Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От David G. Johnston
Тема Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Дата
Msg-id CAKFQuwamrEtOp2swR38MWNNYatu_L2YUMjNO=Nw3kKRvMymOCQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Список pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 11:38 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 8:25 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Attached are screenshots of the same segment of table 9.10 as before
>> and of the initial portion of 9.30, the patch against HEAD to produce
>> these, and a hacky patch on the website's main.css to get it to go
>> along.  Without the last you just get all the subsidiary stuff
>> left-justified if you build with STYLE=website, which isn't impossibly
>> unreadable but it's not the desired presentation.

> These seem very nice, and way more readable than the version with
> which you started the thread.


I too like the layout result.
Glad you like 'em ;-).  Do you have an opinion about what to do
with the operator tables --- ie do we need a column with the operator
name at the left?


I feel like writing them as:

+ (date, integer) -> date

makes more sense as they are mainly sorted on the operator symbol as opposed to the left operand.

I think the description line is beneficial, and easy enough to skim over for the trained eye just looking for a refresher on the example syntax.

David J.

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Thomas Munro
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: spin_delay() for ARM
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?