public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Jürgen Purtz <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Math function description issue
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 09:31:25 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<CAB7nPqSiJwS_YTyy_v5ZDKV-ywGs5wV9YrXwT=uOp1hMS-oY=A@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsub%20pgsql-docs>

The standard says:

"<ceiling function> computes the least integer greater than or equal to 
its argument."

a) In my opinion this wording is easier to understand because it avoids 
the negation via "not less".
b) To dispel the ambiguities concerning what is greater or lesser (with 
negative numbers) we may add a second example with +42.8 and an 
additional comment - something like: "Please consider the situation with 
negative numbers: -42 is greater than -43".

Jürgen Purtz



On 07.06.2016 05:06, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <[email protected]> writes:
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:40 PM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Please, check ceil, ceiling and floor functions. Example is correct, but
>>> description is wrong.
>> We could make things indeed more precise. Say for ceil, we use
>> "smallest *following* integer", and for floor, "largest *previous*
>> integer", and we keep the mention to "not less/greater than argument"
>> to show the fact that a numeric already rounded to an integer is equal
>> to itself. See the patch attached.
> Meh --- I'm not sure that adding previous/following really adds much
> clarity.  Either with the existing wording or with yours, the statement
> is correct as long as you read "smaller" as "closer to minus infinity",
> a/k/a "further left on the number line".  But if you are thinking it
> means "closer to zero", which is what I think the OP is thinking, this
> won't do much to disabuse you of your confusion.
>
> We had a similar complaint not long ago, so it does seem that the
> wording could stand to be clarified.  But I doubt this way fixes it.
> Not sure how to do better ...
>
> 			regards, tom lane
>
>



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

view thread (8+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Math function description issue
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox