Re: Re: [HACKERS] Re: 7.1 docs
От | Roberto Mello |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [HACKERS] Re: 7.1 docs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20010325092310.A8329@cc.usu.edu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Re: 7.1 docs (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: [HACKERS] Re: 7.1 docs
|
Список | pgsql-docs |
On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 11:32:02AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > A "page per function" approach is clearly overkill for the vast majority > of our functions. I think that's not unrelated to the fact that no one's > ever bothered to prepare such documentation ;-) Agreed. > On the other hand, the existing layout of the User's Guide encourages a > "line per function" approach, which is insufficient for at least some > functions. We've worked around that by adding paragraphs below the main > table on each page, but that seems a little awkward in many cases. Again I agree. The functions docs are insufficient for most functions I would say. I like the way the Oracle functions are documented, except for the fact that they have one huge page for all functions, which is hard on those on slow connections reading docs online. They have functions in tables grouped per functionality (e.g. character functions that returning character values, character functions returning number values) and with each function name (which is all that is in the table) is linked to a larger explanation of the function with the complete syntax and examples (usually two). http://oradoc.photo.net/ora81/DOC/server.815/a67779/function.htm#1028572 -Roberto -- +----| http://fslc.usu.edu USU Free Software & GNU/Linux Club|------+ Roberto Mello - Computer Science, USU - http://www.brasileiro.net http://www.sdl.usu.edu - Space Dynamics Lab, Web Developer If it wasn't for C, we would be using BASI, PASAL and OBOL!
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: