Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
> po 5. 10. 2020 v 15:56 odesílatel Thomas Kellerer <shammat@gmx.net> napsal:
>> So instead of
>> make_interval ( [ year int [, month int [, week int [, day int [, hour
>> int [, min int [, sec double precision ]]]]]]] )
>> it should be
>> make_interval ( [ years int [, months int [, weeks int [, days int
>> [,hours int [, mins int [, secs double precision ]]]]]]] )
Right, fixed.
> this syntax is not correct too
> It should be
> make_interval( years int default 0, month int default 0, days int
> default 0, hours int default 0, secs double precision default 0)
IIRC, I intentionally changed that in v13; the existence of the defaults
is sufficiently covered by the text "... fields, each of which can default
to zero". I think that was partly motivated by trying to get the function
signature to fit into limited space. The final docs-table design we ended
up with might allow undoing it, but I don't see any real reason to. The
other way is more verbose and not any clearer.
I spent a little bit of time scanning for other discrepancies between
func.sgml and pg_proc.proargnames, and found several, mostly though
not exclusively in the JSON functions. In these other cases, though,
I think there might be a good argument for making pg_proc fit the docs
not the other way around. In the JSON functions, for example, pg_proc
randomly has some functions calling the main JSON[B] input "target"
while others call it "from_json" or "json_in". I'm not real sure
which of those names is preferable, but inconsistency is not preferable.
regards, tom lane
