Re: Does "verbose" Need to be Reserved?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
Cc: david(at)kineticode(dot)com ("David E(dot) Wheeler"), PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Does "verbose" Need to be Reserved?
Date: 2009-12-16 22:29:39
Message-ID: 17728.1261002579@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
> Looking at it more closely, this is likely to be fallout from the
> plpgsql lexer/parser changes; it probably worked before only because
> plpgsql was doing its own thing rather than using the main lexer.

Hmm .. yeah, words that are reserved according to the main grammar
could have worked as plpgsql variable names before, since they always
got replaced with "$n" before the main grammar saw them.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2009-12-16 22:31:29 Re: Range types
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-12-16 22:25:33 Re: Largeobject Access Controls (r2460)