On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 2:45 AM, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:
> After looking at the generated html version, I find that the "1/param" and
> "2/param" formula are very simple and pretty easy to read, and they would
> not be really enhanced with additional spacing.
>
> ISTM that adaptative spacing (no spacing for level 1 operations, some for
> higher level) is a good approach for readability, ie:
>
> f(i) - f(i+1)
> ^ no spacing here
> ^ some spacing here
>
> So I would suggest to keep the submitted version, unless this is a blocker.
Well, I think with the ".0" version it looks more like floating-point
math, and I like the extra white-space. But I'm happy to hear other
opinions.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
