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: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, 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: 2020-04-18T12:27:12Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:30 PM David G. Johnston
<david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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 thought about that, too, but I think the way Tom did it is better.
It's much more natural to see it using the syntax with which it will
actually be invoked.

-- 
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.