public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: documentation structure
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:05:32 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <CA+TgmoZ2F+K0j=6BOJLD=YfpJMdJRXC7sWmtXGRjx1Rq0x8PUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD5tBcJUVQu=9zpr9C+Z=3SjxrECURtr_i1oipMqke4dpZXtyQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>

Andres Freund <[email protected]> writes:
> I think we should work on generating a lot of func.sgml.  Particularly the
> signature etc should just come from pg_proc.dat, it's pointlessly painful to
> generate that by hand. And for a lot of the functions we should probably move
> the existing func.sgml comments to the description in pg_proc.dat.

Where are you going to get the examples and text descriptions from?
(And no, I don't agree that the pg_description string should match
what's in the docs.  The description string has to be a short
one-liner in just about every case.)

This sounds to me like it would be a painful exercise with not a
lot of benefit in the end.

I do agree with Andrew that splitting func.sgml into multiple files
would be beneficial.

			regards, tom lane

view thread (38+ 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], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: documentation structure
  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