On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 2:45 AM, Fabien COELHO <coe...@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote: > After looking at the generated html version, I find that the "1/param" and > "2/param" formula are very simple and pretty easy to read, and they would > not be really enhanced with additional spacing. > > ISTM that adaptative spacing (no spacing for level 1 operations, some for > higher level) is a good approach for readability, ie: > > f(i) - f(i+1) > ^ no spacing here > ^ some spacing here > > So I would suggest to keep the submitted version, unless this is a blocker.
Well, I think with the ".0" version it looks more like floating-point math, and I like the extra white-space. But I'm happy to hear other opinions. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
