On Mon, 9 Dec 2019 21:04:21 +0100 Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I fixed almost all mentioned issues (that I understand) If you don't understand you might ask, or at least say. That way I know you've noticed my remarks and I don't have to repeat them. I have 2 remaining suggestions. 1) As previously suggested: Consider moving all the code you added to numeric.c to right after the scale() related code. This is equivalent to what was done in pg_proc.dat and regression tests where all the scale related stuff is in one place in the file. 2) Now that the function is called min_scale() it might be nice if your "minscale" variable in numeric.c was named "min_scale". I don't feel particularly strongly about either of the above but think them a slight improvement. I also wonder whether all the trim_scale() tests are now necessary, but not enough to make any suggestions. Especially because, well, tests are good. Regards, Karl <k...@meme.com> Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward." -- Robert A. Heinlein