| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Document NULL |
| Date: | 2024-05-03 15:16:26 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwZgmwUDegus9WFK5WgKRp9i89b7g0ea4dXzBJNysuHHuw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 7:10 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
wrote:
> On 02.05.24 17:23, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > Version 2 attached. Still a draft, focused on topic picking and overall
> > structure. Examples and links planned plus the usual semantic markup
> stuff.
> >
> > I chose to add a new sect1 in the user guide (The SQL Language) chapter,
> > "Data".
>
> Please, let's not.
>
If a committer wants to state the single place in the documentation to put
this I'm content to put it there while leaving my reasoning of choices in
place for future bike-shedding. My next options to decide between are the
appendix or the lead chapter in Data Types. It really doesn't fit inside
DDL IMO which is the only other suggestion I've seen (and an uncertain, or
at least unsubstantiated, one) and a new chapter meets both criteria Tom
laid out, so long as this is framed as more than just having to document
null values.
> A stylistic note: "null" is an adjective. You can talk about a "null
> value" or a value "is null".
>
Will do.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-05-03 15:44:03 | Re: Document NULL |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2024-05-03 15:09:32 | Re: Tarball builds in the new world order |