Re: Proposal for Signal Detection Refactoring
От | Dmitry Dolgov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Proposal for Signal Detection Refactoring |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+q6zcUQESfnBtfrbz4q_yg=K2xzrVOLu9UC-81YOsmVw8PGJA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Proposal for Signal Detection Refactoring (Chris Travers <chris.travers@adjust.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Proposal for Signal Detection Refactoring
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 7:10 PM Chris Travers <chris.travers@adjust.com> wrote: > >> More generally, I'd like this material to be code comments. It's the >> kind of stuff that gets outdated before long if it's kept separate. > > The problem is that code comments are not going to be good places to document "how do I check for pending actions?" Thatcould be moved to the main SGML I guess..... I aggree with Peter here, for me it also feels more natural to have this information as code commentaries - at least if I would search for it that would be my first thought. As for "how do I..." part, I think there are alreasy similar commentaries in the code, which makes sense - this kind of questions usually appear when you're reading/writing some code. It doesn't look like there is much left to do in this discussion, but for now I'll move it to the next CF.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: