Re: Incorrect Syntax in Function Syntax diagram

2021-06-23 Thread Tom Lane
"David G. Johnston" writes: > Do we have an existing convention in the syntax section to indicate > defaults, either with emphasis, placement, or even an annotation like "*"? No. The syntax diagrams verge on unreadability already, so I'm unconvinced that trying to overload them with this issue w

Re: Incorrect Syntax in Function Syntax diagram

2021-06-23 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 8:29 AM Tom Lane wrote: > Yeah. The way it's written fails to show, except via formatting, > that IMMUTABLE/STABLE/VOLATILE are mutually exclusive; > It seems the STRICT -ness line needs brackets too then. Also, back to volatility, volatile is the default option though

Re: Incorrect Syntax in Function Syntax diagram

2021-06-23 Thread Tom Lane
"David G. Johnston" writes: > On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 6:31 AM PG Doc comments form > wrote: > Please separate the [ NOT ] LEAKPROOF from the OR list > I would agree, and would add that I wonder whether the syntax for the three > mutually exclusive options should be shown as such instead of havin

Re: Incorrect Syntax in Function Syntax diagram

2021-06-23 Thread David G. Johnston
On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 6:31 AM PG Doc comments form wrote: > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: > > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/13/sql-createfunction.html > Description: > > | IMMUTABLE | STABLE | VOLATILE | [ NOT ] LEAKPROOF > > [ NOT ] LEAKPROOF is a

Incorrect Syntax in Function Syntax diagram

2021-06-23 Thread PG Doc comments form
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website: Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/13/sql-createfunction.html Description: | IMMUTABLE | STABLE | VOLATILE | [ NOT ] LEAKPROOF [ NOT ] LEAKPROOF is accepting separately , So why you written [ NOT ] LEAKPROOF with | IMMUTABLE