Re: factorial doc bug? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Lockhart
Subject Re: factorial doc bug?
Date
Msg-id 3B9EBBE5.24428C77@fourpalms.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to factorial doc bug?  (Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp>)
Responses Re: factorial doc bug?
Re: factorial doc bug?
List pgsql-hackers
> Are you saying we should remove the whole chapter below from the docs?

Hmm. I wrote that :/

I vaguely recall some discussion of this topic (a few months ago?). I'm
not certain that the current behavior was an intended result of changes
in the "automatic coersion" algorithms, but I think it was. Tom Lane is
probably the person who made those changes, and we should have him in
the discussion on whether the current behavior is appropriate. 

Keep in mind that he is a mathematician, and I'll guess that he won't
have much patience with folks who expect a result for a factorial of a
fractional number ;) But there may have been another case which made it
clearer that the old behavior was a bad road to take. We can look at the
archives, right?
                  - Thomas


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Lockhart
Date:
Subject: Re: factorial doc bug?
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Escaping strings for inclusion into SQL queries