On 28 July 2014 10:34, Marko Tiikkaja <ma...@joh.to> wrote:
> On 7/28/14 11:27 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> On 26 July 2014 18:14, Marko Tiikkaja <ma...@joh.to> wrote:
>>> Today I'd like to present a way to get rid of code like this:
>> You haven't explained this very well... there is nothing that explains
>> WHY you want this.
>> In the absence of a good explanation and a viable benefit, I would
>> vote -1 for this feature suggestion.
> Yes, I did a poor job in the original email, but I did explain my reasoning
> later:

With respect, I think you did a poor job the second time too. I can't
find a clearly explained reasoning behind the proposal, nor do I
understand what the problem was.

One of the things I do is work hard on my initial explanations and
reasoning. This helps me because I frequently end up not proposing
something because my reasoning was poor, but it also helps me focus on
whether I am solving a real problem by sharepening my understanding of
the actual problem. And it also helps Tom (or others) demolish things
more quickly with a well placed "indeed" ;-)

 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to