From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
Cc: | Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: tsearch in core patch, for inclusion |
Date: | 2007-02-21 15:09:45 |
Message-ID: | 13525.1172070585@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
"Florian G. Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> writes:
> Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
>>> Are there any ongoing efforts to rewrite the parser (i.e. using
>>> another algorithm, like a recursive descent parser)?
>> Why would you want to do that?
> Last, but not least, the C and C++ syntax is basically set in stone - At
> least now the g++ supports nearly all (or all? don't know) of the C++
> standard. So it doesn't really matter if changes to the parse are a bit
> more work, because the rarely happen. Postgres seems to add new features
> that change the grammar with every release (with is a good thing!).
Yeah. I think it would be a pretty bad idea for us to go over to a
handwritten parser: not only greater implementation effort for grammar
changes, but greater risk of introducing bugs. Bison tells you about it
when you've written something ambiguous ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2007-02-21 15:24:08 | Status of Hierarchical Queries |
Previous Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2007-02-21 15:09:08 | Re: New feature request: FlashBack Query |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-02-21 15:12:31 | Re: [pgsql-patches] Patch to avoid gprofprofilingoverwrites |
Previous Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2007-02-21 14:59:17 | Re: tsearch in core patch, for inclusion |