Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > The new style seems good, but I don't really agree that "positive" and > "non-negative" are ambiguous. "positive" means >0 and "non-negative" > means >= 0, because 0 is neither positive nor negative.
Well, the point is precisely that not everyone makes that distinction.
I agree that everyone will read "non-negative" as ">= 0"; but there's
a fair percentage of the population that uses "positive" the same way.
regards, tom lane
