Re: Bogus documentation for bogus geometric operators

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: emre@hasegeli.com
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-04-28T17:33:24Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Emre Hasegeli <emre@hasegeli.com> writes:
>> Perhaps it's too late in the v13 cycle to actually do anything
>> about this code-wise, but what should I do documentation-wise?
>> I'm certainly not eager to document that these operators behave
>> inconsistently depending on which type you're talking about.

> I don't think we need to worry too much about doing something in the
> v13 cycle.  The geometric operators had and evidently still have so
> many bugs.  Nobody complains about them other than the developers who
> read the code.

Yeah, I ended up just documenting the current state of affairs.

> I am happy to prepare a patch for the next release to fix the current
> operators and add the missing ones.

Sounds great!

			regards, tom lane



Commits

  1. Rename the "point is strictly above/below point" comparison operators.

  2. Remove deprecated containment operators for built-in types