From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jan Wieck <wieck(at)debis(dot)com>, PostgreSQL HACKERS <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] FOREIGN KEY and shift/reduce |
Date: | 1999-12-10 05:31:04 |
Message-ID: | 199912100531.AAA16495@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Well, I'm not a guru, but I looked anyway. It's a mess. The problem
> > is that when NOT is the next token, the grammar doesn't know whether
> > the NOT is starting NOT NULL, which would be a new ColConstraintElem,
> > or starting NOT DEFERRABLE, which would be part of the current
> > ColConstraintElem. So it can't decide whether it's time to reduce
> > the current stack contents to a finished ColConstraintElem or not.
> > The only way to do that is to look ahead further than the NOT.
> Tom and I talked about moving NOT DEFERED up into the main level with
> NOT NULL.
>
> In gram.y, line 949 and line, could there be a test that if the last
> List element of $1 is a constraint, and if $2 is NOT DEFERED, we can set
> the bit in $1 and just skip adding the defered node? If not, we can
> throw an error.
Also, I am using flex 2.5.4, and an seeing no shift-reduce errors from
the current gram.y.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-12-10 05:44:55 | 6.6 release |
Previous Message | The Hermit Hacker | 1999-12-10 05:30:45 | Re: [HACKERS] pgsql web site busted? |