Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jPaES-0003IO-W3 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 23:17:12 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jPaER-0007cn-4g for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 23:17:11 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jPaEQ-0007bf-U4 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 23:17:10 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jPaEK-0006jo-HH for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 23:17:10 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 03HNGxOE006656; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 19:16:59 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: "David G. Johnston" cc: Robert Haas , Alvaro Herrera , Steven Pousty , Pavel Stehule , Isaac Morland , Pierre Giraud , PostgreSQL Developers Subject: Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign? In-reply-to: References: <20200416230304.GA28390@alvherre.pgsql> <17560.1587083109@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20266.1587148695@sss.pgh.pa.us> <6099.1587164691@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to "David G. Johnston" message dated "Fri, 17 Apr 2020 16:08:19 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <6654.1587165419.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 19:16:59 -0400 Message-ID: <6655.1587165419@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk "David G. Johnston" writes: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 4:04 PM Tom Lane wrote: >> Especially not for unary operators, where >> ALTER OPERATOR would have us write "- (NONE, integer)". > I'd drop the parens for unary and just write "- integer" We do have some postfix operators still ... although it looks like there's only one in core. In any case, the signature line is *the* thing that is supposed to specify what the syntax is, so I'm not too pleased with using an ambiguous notation for it. regards, tom lane