From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | "Karl O(dot) Pinc" <kop(at)karlpinc(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Subject: | Re: Patch to document base64 encoding |
Date: | 2019-07-14 09:07:17 |
Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.21.1907141101010.22273@lancre |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Karl,
>> It really works in research papers: "Theorem X can be proven by
>> applying Proposition Y. See Figure 2 for details. Algorithm Z
>> describes whatever, which is listed in Table W..."
>
> I've not thought about it before but I suppose the difference is between
> declarative and descriptive, the latter being more inviting and better
> allows for flow between sentences. Otherwise you're writing in bullet
> points. So it is a question of balance between specification and
> narration. In regular prose you're always going to see the "the" unless
> the sentence starts with the name. The trouble is that we can't start
> sentences with function names because of capitalization confusion.
Sure. For me "Function" would work as a title on its name, as in "Sir
Samuel", "Doctor Frankenstein", "Mister Bean", "Professor Layton"...
"Function sqrt" and solves the casing issue on the function name which is
better not capitalized.
--
Fabien.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Gierth | 2019-07-14 11:19:43 | Re: pg_stat_statements vs. SELECT FOR UPDATE |
Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2019-07-14 08:50:12 | Re: pgbench - implement strict TPC-B benchmark |