Re: Documenting removal of nonnullvalue() and friends

I wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I thought about this a bit more last night. It's certainly true that
>>> a lot of "internal" functions have comments that don't suggest that
>>> they're not meant to be used directly. What I think would be a good
>>> plan for functions that underlie operators is that we move any useful
>>> comments from pg_proc to pg_operator, and then install a comment in
>>> pg_proc that says "implementation of operator +" (or whatever the
>>> operator name is).
>>> ...
>>> If that sounds like a reasonable plan, I'm willing to have a go at it
>>> after the commitfest closes.

>> Tom, any work on this? A TODO?

> I haven't done anything about this yet, but it's still on my to-do list.

Done now.

regards, tom lane