| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: New "function tables" in V13 documentation |
| Date: | 2020-11-09 23:16:23 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwaSjzEaC_Dbs7tqvnGT6hvOuAsmmfGf2jkpF4niTECA9g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 3:30 PM Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On 11/9/20 3:05 PM, David G. Johnston wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 2:01 PM Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> My suggestion is to add a "table of contents" at the top of non-trivial
>> sections that simply lists available functions by name (generally ignoring
>> argument variations) and a quick one line description of purpose. Once a
>> person finds the name of the function that suits their needs they can then
>> reference the main table for details, warnings, and examples.
>>
>>
>> This is what TOCs are for, no?
>>
>>
> Are you criticizing my over-explanation of the phrase "table of contents"
> here?
>
>
> Why do you think that?
>
> I'm *agreeing* this is why TOCs were invented.
>
>
Because agreement without elaboration usually just merits a +1 so I read
more into the statement than you intended.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Lewis | 2020-11-10 00:15:52 | Re: Execution plan does not use index |
| Previous Message | Ron | 2020-11-09 22:30:13 | Re: New "function tables" in V13 documentation |