Re: proposal: variadic argument support for least, greatest function

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: proposal: variadic argument support for least, greatest function
Date: 2019-03-11 22:07:01
Message-ID: 5388.1552342021@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I'm going to mark this as rejected. Here's a possible doc patch

Maybe s/strictly/ordinary/, or some other word? "strictly"
doesn't convey much to me. Otherwise seems fine.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2019-03-11 22:25:40 Re: proposal: variadic argument support for least, greatest function
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-03-11 21:36:24 Re: Why don't we have a small reserved OID range for patch revisions?