From: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Joel Jacobson <joel(at)gluefinance(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Herrera Alvaro <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Bug in pg_describe_object, patch v2 |
Date: | 2011-01-17 20:58:42 |
Message-ID: | 1295297922.29248.16.camel@jansson |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 14:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> One other point here is that I find messages like this a mite
> unreadable:
>
> function 1 (oidvector[], oidvector[]) btoidvectorcmp(oidvector,oidvector) of operator family array_ops for access method gin
>
> If we were to go with this, I'd be strongly tempted to rearrange all
> four of the messages involved to put the operator or function name
> at the end, eg
>
> function 1 (oidvector[], oidvector[]) of operator family array_ops for access method gin: btoidvectorcmp(oidvector,oidvector)
Yes, I agree with you that the second is much more readable with out
without the lefttype and righttype.
function 1 of operator family array_ops for access method gin: btoidvectorcmp(oidvector,oidvector)
is more readable in my opinion than,
function 1 btoidvectorcmp(oidvector,oidvector) of operator family array_ops for access method gin
Regards,
Andreas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2011-01-17 21:07:45 | Re: Bug in pg_describe_object, patch v2 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-01-17 20:51:57 | Re: Warning compiling pg_dump (MinGW, Windows XP) |