Horton

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

David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, 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: 2020-04-17T23:08:19Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 4:04 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> Especially not for unary operators, where
> ALTER OPERATOR would have us write "- (NONE, integer)".
>

I'd drop the parens for unary and just write "- integer"

It is a bit geeky but then again SQL writers are not typically computer
language novices so operators should be comfortable for them and this isn't
that off-the-wall.  But I agree with the concern.

David J.

Commits

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

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