| From: | "Ansley, Michael" <Michael(dot)Ansley(at)intec(dot)co(dot)za> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Leon <leon(at)udmnet(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: [HACKERS] Postgres' lexer |
| Date: | 1999-09-03 07:32:38 |
| Message-ID: | 1BF7C7482189D211B03F00805F8527F748C031@S-NATH-EXCH2 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>>
>> No good: we already have some. There are three standard geometric
>> operators named "?-" ... not to mention lord-knows-what user-defined
<snip>
>> It would also be worth remembering that "-" is far from the
>> only unary
>> operator name we have, and so a solution that creates
>> special behavior
>> just for "-" is really no solution at all. Making a special case for
>> "-" just increases the potential for confusion, not
>> decreases it, IMHO.
>>
This is even more of a reason to remove it from where it is currently. The
code in the parser now is explicitly for a minus. I think an idea might be
to check out some other SQL scanner implementations, and see how they do it.
I will also speak to Vern, and see if he can shed any light on the matter.
MikeA
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ansley, Michael | 1999-09-03 07:46:39 | RE: [HACKERS] Postgres' lexer |
| Previous Message | Andreas Zeugswetter | 1999-09-03 07:13:52 | Re: [HACKERS] SELECT BUG |