From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
cc: Alan B <alan77codebits@gmail.com>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Add clarification example to EXEC SQL CONNECT with password
In-reply-to: <20130125172959.GB6848@momjian.us>
References: 
 <CAGbN=G6P1dy4Q03oKdQig_oUWj82W_x67MRMwX2J+9DrFc=cxw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130125161942.GA6848@momjian.us> <14376.1359134732@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<20130125172959.GB6848@momjian.us>
Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
	message dated "Fri, 25 Jan 2013 12:29:59 -0500"
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 12:50:12 -0500
Message-ID: <14933.1359136212@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:25:32PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> ! EXEC SQL CONNECT TO :target USER :user USING :passwd;
>>> ! 
>>> ! EXEC SQL CONNECT TO :target USER :user/:passwd;

>> This sure looks like it has broken the intention of the paragraph
>> immediately after the example.  Also, it seems like you are providing
>> two alternative ways of doing the same thing, but not explaining that.
>> How is a reader supposed to know that he doesn't have to do both
>> commands?

> Yeah, I was worried about that, so I added the blank line.  If you look
> at the docs, we already are providing three connection examples, so now
> there are four.  You can see the current docs here (the official ones
> are not updated yet):
> 	http://momjian.us/pgsql_docs/ecpg-connect.html#ECPG-CONNECTING
> I am open to suggestions.

(looks at the whole section) As-is, it's definitely not good, because
before there were three independent examples, and now there are three
and a half --- the added example depends on the variables declared in
the third example.  But using the blank line means you've formatted it
as a stand-alone fourth example, which is not only wrong in itself but
it screws up the meanings of both of the subsequent paragraphs.

Perhaps changing that blank line to something like " /* or */" would
help?  Then it would look more like an alternative within the same
example, which would also help with making the following two paras
still be sensible.

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs