Re: Bug in pg_describe_object, patch v2

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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)