From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 1331528A64 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 06:11:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9LLcpjMFW8fq for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 06:11:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp42.i.mail.ru (smtp42.i.mail.ru [94.100.177.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTPS id C9F6F284C7 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 06:11:52 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 13:11:52 +0300 From: Alexander Turenko Subject: [tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH 2/2] sql: remove GLOB from Tarantool Message-ID: <20180911101152.jjfo6zakd37thoxf@tkn_work_nb> References: <4607dc428909e96915e9f0984a7733a0890a3185.1534436836.git.n.tatunov@tarantool.org> <76466086-2a5f-8f12-cbc3-4ddf26e30fd9@tarantool.org> <32D1E5EA-EA21-4E4B-B5F5-80B6578BFBED@tarantool.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <32D1E5EA-EA21-4E4B-B5F5-80B6578BFBED@tarantool.org> Sender: tarantool-patches-bounce@freelists.org Errors-to: tarantool-patches-bounce@freelists.org Reply-To: tarantool-patches@freelists.org List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: tarantool-patches List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: To: Nikita Tatunov Cc: Alex Khatskevich , Nikita Pettik , tarantool-patches@freelists.org Hi! See below. WBR, Alexandr Turenko. On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 10:38:38AM +0300, Nikita Tatunov wrote: > Hello, thank you for comments. > See full diff is at the end of the letter. > > >>>> > >>>> - "ESCAPE expression must be a single character", > >>>> + "ESCAPE expression must be a" > >>>> + " single character", > >>> Do not split error messages at the middle of a sentence. It makes errors ungreppable. > >>> Make it <80 somehow different. > >>> > >> > >> Have already been discussed in this thread. > > I suppose that we concluded to try to fit into 80 and split the string only > > in case it is impossible. > > I don’t think so. Anyways, Alexander could you please give your thoughts? Nikita P. gives key_def.c as the example where we don't create constant variables in the case. We shouldn't here too I think. At least it should not be enforced.