Horton

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

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Steven Pousty <steve.pousty@gmail.com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>, Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com>, Pierre Giraud <pierre.giraud@dalibo.com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-04-17T18:26:37Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
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.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Commits

  1. Doc: re-re-revise markup for tables of functions.

  2. Doc: revise formatting of function/operator tables.