Обсуждение: A typo?

The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:

Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/plpgsql-declarations.html
Description:

Under 43.3.1, "Notice that we omitted RETURNS real — we could have included
it, but it would be redundant."
Should that be "RETURNS tax" instead of "RETURNS real"?

The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:

Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/plpgsql-declarations.html
Description:

Under 43.3.1, "Notice that we omitted RETURNS real — we could have included
it, but it would be redundant."
Should that be "RETURNS tax" instead of "RETURNS real"?

On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 6:30 PM PG Doc comments form
<noreply@postgresql.org> wrote:
>
> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/plpgsql-declarations.html
> Description:
>
> Under 43.3.1, "Notice that we omitted RETURNS real — we could have included
> it, but it would be redundant."
> Should that be "RETURNS tax" instead of "RETURNS real"?

I think it's related to the plpgsql "RETURNS" and "RETURN" confusion.
RETURN  can appear between "begin", "end".
RETURNS need to specify before "AS".

not omit "RETURNS real" would be:

CREATE FUNCTION sales_tax(subtotal real,  OUT tax real) returns real AS $$
BEGIN
tax := subtotal * 0.06;
END;
$$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;

"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> On Saturday, April 6, 2024, PG Doc comments form <noreply@postgresql.org>
> wrote:
>> Under 43.3.1, "Notice that we omitted RETURNS real — we could have included
>> it, but it would be redundant."
>> Should that be "RETURNS tax" instead of "RETURNS real"?

> The docs are correct.

Specifically, that bit is a declaration of the data type of the
function's result, not a specification of how to compute it.

            regards, tom lane