From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
        Steven Pousty <steve.pousty@gmail.com>,
        Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>,
        Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com>,
        Pierre Giraud <pierre.giraud@dalibo.com>,
        PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
In-reply-to: 
 <CA+TgmoYP2Lx=e1EbkJo-EVH6nWP8=+Rbu=u3LcnzWvh=VY47zA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20200416230304.GA28390@alvherre.pgsql>
 <17560.1587083109@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+TgmoYP2Lx=e1EbkJo-EVH6nWP8=+Rbu=u3LcnzWvh=VY47zA@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
	message dated "Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:26:37 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <20265.1587148695.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 14:38:15 -0400
Message-ID: <20266.1587148695@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 8:25 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Attached are screenshots of the same segment of table 9.10 as before
>> and of the initial portion of 9.30, the patch against HEAD to produce
>> these, and a hacky patch on the website's main.css to get it to go
>> along.  Without the last you just get all the subsidiary stuff
>> left-justified if you build with STYLE=website, which isn't impossibly
>> unreadable but it's not the desired presentation.

> These seem very nice, and way more readable than the version with
> which you started the thread.

Glad you like 'em ;-).  Do you have an opinion about what to do
with the operator tables --- ie do we need a column with the operator
name at the left?

			regards, tom lane