From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, davs2rt(at)gmail(dot)com, Pg Docs <pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Conventions |
Date: | 2022-01-26 00:15:45 |
Message-ID: | 2352062.1643156145@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
"David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> There is an implied "anything else not noted here should be taken as
> literal token to type, or a variable, as context dictates" [1] - and since
> () isn't mentioned...
> I'd probably rather make that implied part explicit and avoid mentioning
> parentheses explicitly.
+1. I mean, if we have to say this for parentheses, what about
commas, dashes, etc?
> I would suggest moving the Tcl parenthetical to its own sentence. The
> percentage of readers who will notice or care about Tcl synopses is
> probably close to zero, and they are likely to be familiar enough to not
> need our preface to enlighten them.
Maybe time to drop the Tcl reference altogether? I like that language,
but I fear it's next door to dead, so it certainly doesn't need to be
mentioned outside the pltcl docs.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2022-01-26 01:35:14 | Re: Conventions |
Previous Message | Dave Stewart | 2022-01-25 22:35:50 | Re: Conventions |