Re: libpq documentation cleanups (repost 3)

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 8:54 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > I am also attaching a few more of Leslie's changes that I think are
> > useful. ?The first clarifies a confusion Leslie had about the fact that
> > "return" is referencing the return value of the function and not the
> > value returned in the pointer.
> 
> Hmm.  Well, if that's the confusion, I don't think inserting the words
> "by the function" is the right way to fix it - it certainly isn't
> returned by anything else.  You could change it to say "It is also
> possible for *errmsg to be NULL even when the return value is also
> NULL; this indicates..."
> 
> > The second change is, I think, better wording.
> 
> OK.
> 
> > The third moves the "deprecated" text to the start of the function
> > description. ?Leslie pointed out that that is how we do it for other
> > libpq functions, so we should move it for consistency.
> 
> That seems to me to read pretty awkwardly.  You could perhaps strike
> the chunk and the whole first paragraph and simply write "PQoidStatus
> is an older, deprecated version of PQoidValue.  It returns its result
> as a character string rather than an Oid, and is not thread-safe." and
> then cut directly to the synopsis.  That would be consistent with what
> we've done elsewhere; moving just that one sentence is not.

OK, I have made the adjustments you mentioned with my own wording
(attached and applied).  Let me know of any more needed adjustments.
Thanks.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +