| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Steven Pousty <steve(dot)pousty(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pierre Giraud <pierre(dot)giraud(at)dalibo(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign? |
| Date: | 2020-04-28 15:19:30 |
| Message-ID: | 30469.1588087170@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> On 4/27/20 8:49 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Other than that point, the main.css patch as I presented it just adds
>> some rules that aren't used yet, so it could be pushed as soon as you're
>> satisfied about the !important change. It'd probably make sense to
>> push it in advance of making the markup changes, so we don't have an
>> interval of near-unreadable devel docs.
> *nods* I'll ensure to test again and hopefully commit later today.
After looking at the JSON function tables, I've concluded that the
ability to have more than one function signature per table cell is
really rather essential not optional. So I'm going to go ahead and
convert all the existing markup to the <para>-based style I proposed
on Sunday. Please push the main.css change when you can.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2020-04-28 15:51:43 | Re: Proposing WITH ITERATIVE |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2020-04-28 15:17:33 | Re: Binary search in ScalarArrayOpExpr for OR'd constant arrays |