Re: Bogus documentation for bogus geometric operators

Emre Hasegeli <emre(at)hasegeli(dot)com> writes:
>> Perhaps it's too late in the v13 cycle to actually do anything
>> about this code-wise, but what should I do documentation-wise?
>> I'm certainly not eager to document that these operators behave
>> inconsistently depending on which type you're talking about.

> I don't think we need to worry too much about doing something in the
> v13 cycle. The geometric operators had and evidently still have so
> many bugs. Nobody complains about them other than the developers who
> read the code.

Yeah, I ended up just documenting the current state of affairs.

> I am happy to prepare a patch for the next release to fix the current
> operators and add the missing ones.

Sounds great!

regards, tom lane