Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Date: 2020-04-15 18:56:31
Message-ID: CAKFQuwZCskTXyae_rXVL3jHRsGBvE25LGaSAdOD3a_M_wdLDbQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 10:13 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> As discussed in the thread at [1], I've been working on redesigning
> the tables we use to present SQL functions and operators. The
> first installment of that is now up; see tables 9.30 and 9.31 at
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/functions-datetime.html
>
> and table 9.33 at
>
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/functions-enum.html
>
>
The centering of the headers doesn't do it for me. Too much gap and the
data itself is not centered so there is a large disconnect between the
headers and the values.

The run-on aspect of the left-aligned setup is of some concern but maybe
just adding some left padding to the second column - and right padding to
the first - can provide the desired negative space without adding so much
as to break usability.

David J.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ranier Vilela 2020-04-15 19:12:08 Re: PG compilation error with Visual Studio 2015/2017/2019
Previous Message Juan José Santamaría Flecha 2020-04-15 18:27:58 Re: PG compilation error with Visual Studio 2015/2017/2019