Thanks. Part 1 looks, on the whole, fine to me, although I think the
changes to use less whitespace and removing decimal places in the
documentation are going in the wrong direction. That is:
- About 67% of values are drawn from the middle <literal>1.0 /
threshold</>
+ About 67% of values are drawn from the middle <literal>1/param</>,
I would say 1.0 / param, just as we used to say 1.0 / threshold. Any
reason why not?
For the 1.0 -> 1, this because in the example afterwards I set param to 2.0
and I wanted it clear where the one half was coming from, and ISTM that the
2.0 stands out more with "1 / 2.0" than with "1.0 / 2.0".
For the spaces, this is because with just "1/" the space seemed less
necessary for clarity, but it seemed necessary with "1.0 /"
Now it is easy to backtrack.
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.
--
Fabien.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
