Alvaro Herrera <> writes:
> Oh, I see.  That's fine with me.  From the source code it's hard to see
> when a SQL-callable function is only there to implement an operator,
> though (and it seems a bit far-fetched to suppose that the developer
> will think, upon seeing an undocumented function, "oh this must
> implement some operator, I will look it up at pg_proc.h").

> I think the operator(s) should be mentioned in the comment on top of the
> function.

Oh, you're complaining about the lack of any header comment for the
function in the source code.  That's a different matter from the
user-visible docs, but I agree that it's poor practice to not have

                        regards, tom lane

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to