Re: proposal: variadic argument support for least, greatest function

On 02/23/19 13:35, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> please, see, attached patch

It is getting close, for my purposes. There is still this:

>> Can the sentence added to the doc be changed to "These functions support
>> passing parameters as an array after <literal>VARIADIC</literal>
>> keyword."? That is, s/supports/support/ and s/a/an/. I've done that
>> after a couple of recent patches, but it seems to be on springs.

> I know so is important to understand to things, but nobody can understand
> to all. And then it is nice, so the things just works
>>
>> The approach with more parsimony indoors would be to just create a few
>> new ordinary functions, and add to the doc explaining why they are
>> different, and that would be a patch only needing to touch a couple files.
>>
>> I have a feeling that the final decision on whether the indoor or outdoor
>> parsimony matters more will be made by Tom, or another committer; I find
>> myself seeing both sides, and not feeling insider-y enough myself to
>> pick one.
>
> sure, every time it is commiter's decision.


A part of me waits to see if another voice chimes in on the high-level
want/don't-want question ... I think enough of the patch is ready for
that question to be ripe, and if the answer is going to be "don't want"
it would be ideal to know that before additional iterations of work on it.

-Chap