Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Paquier
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 10:42 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:01 AM, Fabien COELHO > wrote: > >> I had a look at this patch. This patch adds some text below a table > >> of functions. Immediately above that table, there is this existing > >> language: > >> > >> The function

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2015-02-02 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:01 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote: >> I had a look at this patch. This patch adds some text below a table >> of functions. Immediately above that table, there is this existing >> language: >> >> The functions working with double precision data are mostly >> implemented on

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2015-01-20 Thread Fabien COELHO
I had a look at this patch. This patch adds some text below a table of functions. Immediately above that table, there is this existing language: The functions working with double precision data are mostly implemented on top of the host system's C library; accuracy and behavior in bounda

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2015-01-19 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote: > Here is a slight update so that type names are treated homogeneously between > both added paragraphs. > > ITSM that this patch should be committed without further ado. I had a look at this patch. This patch adds some text below a table of f

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2014-12-31 Thread Fabien COELHO
Here is a slight update so that type names are treated homogeneously between both added paragraphs. ITSM that this patch should be committed without further ado. -- Fabien.diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml index 2016c5a..f91033b 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml +

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2014-12-21 Thread Michael Paquier
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote: > On 09/14/2014 06:32 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> >> On 9/12/14 3:13 PM, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote: >>> >>> Of course a general rule how to link to WP would be nice ... >> >> >> I think Wikipedia links should be avoided altoget

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2014-10-17 Thread Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum
On 09/14/2014 06:32 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 9/12/14 3:13 PM, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote: Of course a general rule how to link to WP would be nice ... I think Wikipedia links should be avoided altogether. We can assume that readers are technically proficient to look up general techni

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2014-09-14 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 9/12/14 3:13 PM, Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote: > Of course a general rule how to link to WP would be nice ... I think Wikipedia links should be avoided altogether. We can assume that readers are technically proficient to look up general technical concepts on their own using a reference system

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2014-09-13 Thread Fabien COELHO
Of course a general rule how to link to WP would be nice ... I'm afraid that the current implicit rule is more or less "no links", at least there are very few of them but in the glossary, and when I submitted docs with them they were removed before committing. Ideally if external links were

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2014-09-13 Thread David G Johnston
Fabien COELHO-3 wrote >> Of course a general rule how to link to WP would be nice ... > > I'm afraid that the current implicit rule is more or less "no links", at > least there are very few of them but in the glossary, and when I submitted > docs with them they were removed before committing. I

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2014-09-13 Thread Fabien COELHO
Attached is an updated version of the patch. Ok. I notice that you decided against adding tags around function and type names. It's really not about the IEEE changing something, but about someone changing the Wikipedia page. The way I linked it makes sure it always displays the same versi

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2014-09-12 Thread Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum
On 08/21/2014 12:35 PM, Fabien COELHO wrote: I do not understand why the last sentence in the first paragraph about bitwise ops is put there with rounding issues, which seem unrelated. It seems to me that it belongs to the second paragraph which is about bitwise operators. That's the part wh

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2014-08-21 Thread Fabien COELHO
I do not understand why the last sentence in the first paragraph about bitwise ops is put there with rounding issues, which seem unrelated. It seems to me that it belongs to the second paragraph which is about bitwise operators. That's the part which came from Josh Berkus. We discussed this

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2014-08-21 Thread Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum
On 08/21/2014 11:53 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote: attached is a small patch which updates doc/src/sgml/func.sgml. The change explains that functions like round() and others might behave different depending on your operating system (because of rint(3)) and that this is according to an IEEE standard.

Re: [HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2014-08-21 Thread Fabien COELHO
attached is a small patch which updates doc/src/sgml/func.sgml. The change explains that functions like round() and others might behave different depending on your operating system (because of rint(3)) and that this is according to an IEEE standard. It also points out that #.5 is not always r

[HACKERS] documentation update for doc/src/sgml/func.sgml

2014-08-20 Thread Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum
Hi, attached is a small patch which updates doc/src/sgml/func.sgml. The change explains that functions like round() and others might behave different depending on your operating system (because of rint(3)) and that this is according to an IEEE standard. It also points out that #.5 is not alw