Re: [BUGS] BUG #8335: trim() un-document behaviour - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Vik Fearing
Subject Re: [BUGS] BUG #8335: trim() un-document behaviour
Date
Msg-id 52149734.2030905@dalibo.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [BUGS] BUG #8335: trim() un-document behaviour  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: [BUGS] BUG #8335: trim() un-document behaviour  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 08/14/2013 11:27 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 11:31:38PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 05:19:30PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> Attached are docs that add the new syntax, and mention it is
>>> non-standard;  you can see the output here:
>>>
>>>     http://momjian.us/tmp/pgsql/functions-string.html#FUNCTIONS-STRING-SQL
>>>
>>> We do document three syntaxes for substring() in the same table, one row
>>> for each, so there is precedent for doing this.
>> Attached is an updated patch with a proper example.  I could move the
>> extra syntax into the description of the existing trim entry instead.
> Patch applied to head.  I did not apply this to 9.3 in case we change
> our minds about documenting this.

This commit introduced the following:

doc$ make -s html
Processing HTML.index...
2409 entries loaded...
collateindex.pl: duplicated index entry found: TRIM 
1 entries ignored...
Done.
-- 
Vik



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Backup throttling
Next
From: "ciifrancesco@tiscali.it"
Date:
Subject: R: [pgsql-zh-general] (solved - 谢谢) Chinese in Postgres