Thread: Capitalization of "PL/pgSQL"
I happened to notice this while reading the 9.0 release notes. Most
places, "PL/pgSQL" is capitalized (correctly?) like so:
$ find postgresql/ | xargs grep "PL/pgSQL" | wc -l
476
But I also see a decent number of references to this alternate capitalization:
$ find postgresql/ | xargs grep "PL/PgSQL" | wc -l
55
I always assumed "PL/pgSQL" was correct, but does anyone know for
sure? Anyone interested in making consistent all these mentions of
PL/pgSQL in the source (I can send in a patch if needed)?
Josh
Josh Kupershmidt wrote: > I happened to notice this while reading the 9.0 release notes. Most > places, "PL/pgSQL" is capitalized (correctly?) like so: > $ find postgresql/ | xargs grep "PL/pgSQL" | wc -l > 476 > > But I also see a decent number of references to this alternate capitalization: > $ find postgresql/ | xargs grep "PL/PgSQL" | wc -l > 55 > > I always assumed "PL/pgSQL" was correct, but does anyone know for > sure? Anyone interested in making consistent all these mentions of > PL/pgSQL in the source (I can send in a patch if needed)? Sure, it should be PL/pgSQL. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > Josh Kupershmidt wrote: >> I always assumed "PL/pgSQL" was correct, but does anyone know for >> sure? Anyone interested in making consistent all these mentions of >> PL/pgSQL in the source (I can send in a patch if needed)? > > Sure, it should be PL/pgSQL. OK, here's a patch to fix. I tested with "make check" as src/test/regress/expected/plpgsql.out and src/test/regress/sql/plpgsql.sql are touched. Side note: The wiki page "Submitting a Patch": http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Submitting_a_Patch still talks about patch generation with cvs only, maybe someone who's more comfortable thank I am with the patch process wants to change this to talk about git? Josh
Attachment
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 9:41 PM, Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: >> Josh Kupershmidt wrote: >>> I always assumed "PL/pgSQL" was correct, but does anyone know for >>> sure? Anyone interested in making consistent all these mentions of >>> PL/pgSQL in the source (I can send in a patch if needed)? >> >> Sure, it should be PL/pgSQL. > > OK, here's a patch to fix. I tested with "make check" as > src/test/regress/expected/plpgsql.out and > src/test/regress/sql/plpgsql.sql are touched. Committed, except for the changes to the .po files, which I'm given to understand would just get overwritten by the next translation update anyway. Not back-patching, so as to avoid creating unnecessary work for translators. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
On ons, 2010-09-22 at 22:00 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > Not back-patching, so as to avoid creating unnecessary work > for translators. Probably not worth backpatching anyway ... but the patch doesn't actually touch anything translatable.
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: > On ons, 2010-09-22 at 22:00 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> Not back-patching, so as to avoid creating unnecessary work >> for translators. > > Probably not worth backpatching anyway ... but the patch doesn't > actually touch anything translatable. Oh, huh. So are those leftover strings that aren't used any more, or what? [rhaas pgsql]$ git grep -l PL/PgSQL src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/fr.po src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/it.po src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/ja.po src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/ro.po -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue sep 23 09:38:32 -0400 2010: > Oh, huh. So are those leftover strings that aren't used any more, or what? > > [rhaas pgsql]$ git grep -l PL/PgSQL > src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/fr.po > src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/it.po > src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/ja.po > src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/ro.po exactly -- they are in #~ comments. -- Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue sep 23 09:38:32 -0400 2010: > >> Oh, huh. So are those leftover strings that aren't used any more, or what? >> >> [rhaas pgsql]$ git grep -l PL/PgSQL >> src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/fr.po >> src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/it.po >> src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/ja.po >> src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/ro.po > > exactly -- they are in #~ comments. fr and it are, but ja and ro are not. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue sep 23 15:08:31 -0400 2010: > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Alvaro Herrera > <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue sep 23 09:38:32 -0400 2010: > > > >> Oh, huh. So are those leftover strings that aren't used any more, or what? > >> > >> [rhaas pgsql]$ git grep -l PL/PgSQL > >> src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/fr.po > >> src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/it.po > >> src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/ja.po > >> src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/ro.po > > > > exactly -- they are in #~ comments. > > fr and it are, but ja and ro are not. Then ja and ro are out of date (which matches the dates in the headers). -- Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 3:15 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue sep 23 15:08:31 -0400 2010: >> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Alvaro Herrera >> <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of jue sep 23 09:38:32 -0400 2010: >> > >> >> Oh, huh. So are those leftover strings that aren't used any more, or what? >> >> >> >> [rhaas pgsql]$ git grep -l PL/PgSQL >> >> src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/fr.po >> >> src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/it.po >> >> src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/ja.po >> >> src/pl/plpgsql/src/po/ro.po >> > >> > exactly -- they are in #~ comments. >> >> fr and it are, but ja and ro are not. > > Then ja and ro are out of date (which matches the dates in the headers). OK, makes sense. Sorry, my understanding of how the translation stuff works is still a bit thin. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company