| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Karl O(dot) Pinc" <kop(at)meme(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Patch to document base64 encoding |
| Date: | 2019-03-06 18:30:16 |
| Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.21.1903061913540.24790@lancre |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Attached: doc_base64_v7.patch
Patch applies cleanly, doc compiles, navigation tested and ok.
"... section 6.8" -> "... Section 6.8" (capital S).
"The string and the binary encode and decode functions..." sentence looks
strange to me, especially with the English article that I do not really
master, so maybe it is ok. I'd have written something more
straightforward, eg: "Functions encode and decode support the following
encodings:", and also I'd use a direct "Function <...>decode</...> ..."
rather than "The <function>decode</function> function ..." (twice).
Maybe I'd use the exact same grammatical structure for all 3 cases,
starting with "The <>whatever</> encoding converts bla bla bla" instead of
varying the sentences.
Otherwise, all explanations look both precise and useful to me.
--
Fabien.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeremy Schneider | 2019-03-06 18:38:10 | Re: Should we increase the default vacuum_cost_limit? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2019-03-06 18:10:43 | Re: patch to allow disable of WAL recycling |