Re: new json funcs

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: new json funcs
Date: 2014-01-10 19:39:12
Message-ID: 15451.1389382752@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> The history here is that originally I was intending to have these
> functions documented, and so the descriptions were made to match the
> operator descriptions, so that we didn't get a failure on this test.
> Later we decided not to document them as part of last release's
> bike-shedding, but the function descriptions didn't get changed / removed.

Ah. I suppose there's no way to cross-check the state of the function's
pg_description comment against whether it has SGML documentation :-(

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2014-01-10 19:50:12 Re: new json funcs
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-01-10 19:31:31 Re: new json funcs