so 18. 4. 2020 v 22:36 odesílatel Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> napsal:
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 6:30 PM David G. Johnston > <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote: >> I feel like writing them as: >> + (date, integer) -> date >> makes more sense as they are mainly sorted on the operator symbol as opposed to the left operand.
> I thought about that, too, but I think the way Tom did it is better. > It's much more natural to see it using the syntax with which it will > actually be invoked.
Just for the record, I experimented with putting back an "operator name" column, as attached. I think it could be argued either way whether this is an improvement or not.
Some notes:
* The column seems annoyingly wide, but the only way to make it narrower is to narrow or eliminate the column title, which could be confusing. Also, if there's not a fair amount of whitespace, it looks as if the initial name is part of the signature, which is *really* confusing, cf second screenshot. (I'm not sure why the vertical rule is rendered so much more weakly in this case, but it is.)
* I also tried it with valign="middle" to center the operator name among its entries. This was *not* an improvement, it largely breaks the ability to see which entries belong to the name.
first variant looks better, because column with operator is wider.
Maybe it can look better if a content will be places to mid point. In left upper corner it is less readable.
