Re: Re: Updated interval patches (SQL std output, ISO8601 intervals, and interval rounding)

On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 5:32 AM, Ron Mayer
<rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> wrote:
> Brendan Jurd wrote:
>> * AdjustFractionalSeconds => AdjustFractSeconds
>> * AdjustFractionalDays => AdjustFractDays
>
> Otherwise many lines were over 80 chars long.
> And it happened often enough I thought the shorter name
> was less ugly than splitting the arguments in many of the
> places where it's called.

Fair enough. I don't have a strong opinion about that.

>> I *was* going to question the inconsistent use of a space between the
>> pointer qualifier and the argument name, for example:
>>
> I don't mindn cleaning it up; but someone could point me to which direction.
>

Per Tom's comments, the space is sometimes inserted by pg_indent,
because it doesn't know all of the typedefs. So there's no point
trying to clean it up at the moment; next time pg_indent is run over
the code, it will just insert those spaces again.

>> There are some very large-scale changes to the regression tests. ...
>
> Previously, much (but IIRC not quite all) of the interval output stuff
> rounded to the hundredths place regardless of how many significant digits
> there were.

I understood about the rounding issues. I was a bit confused by the
fact that the patch shows differences for an entire table of results
from the horology test, but I've just now realised that the whole
table is different because changing the output precision in some of
the rows has altered the column width.

Makes me wonder whether an unaligned psql output format would be a
better choice for the regression tests. It would certainly make for
clearer diffs. But that's a tangent for another email.

I don't have any further gripes regarding this patch, apart from the
code style stuff I sent through in my previous post. Did you have any
response to those?

Cheers,
BJ