Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Oh, I see. That's fine with me. From the source code it's hard to see
> when a SQL-callable function is only there to implement an operator,
> though (and it seems a bit far-fetched to suppose that the developer
> will think, upon seeing an undocumented function, "oh this must
> implement some operator, I will look it up at pg_proc.h").
> I think the operator(s) should be mentioned in the comment on top of the
> function.
Oh, you're complaining about the lack of any header comment for the
function in the source code. That's a different matter from the
user-visible docs, but I agree that it's poor practice to not have
anything.
regards, tom lane
