Re: factorial doc bug?

From: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: factorial doc bug?
Date: 2001-09-12 01:38:58
Message-ID: 20010912103858F.t-ishii@sra.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > Are you saying we should remove the whole chapter below from the docs?
>
> Hmm. I wrote that :/
>
> I vaguely recall some discussion of this topic (a few months ago?). I'm
> not certain that the current behavior was an intended result of changes
> in the "automatic coersion" algorithms, but I think it was. Tom Lane is
> probably the person who made those changes, and we should have him in
> the discussion on whether the current behavior is appropriate.
>
> Keep in mind that he is a mathematician, and I'll guess that he won't
> have much patience with folks who expect a result for a factorial of a
> fractional number ;) But there may have been another case which made it
> clearer that the old behavior was a bad road to take. We can look at the
> archives, right?

Ok, let's wait for him coming back...
--
Tatsuo Ishii

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 2001-09-12 01:39:23 Re: factorial doc bug?
Previous Message Thomas Lockhart 2001-09-12 01:35:33 Re: factorial doc bug?