Re: tsearch in core patch, for inclusion

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  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