| From: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | John DeSoi <desoi(at)pgedit(dot)com>, "'pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org' SQL" <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: info is a reserved word? |
| Date: | 2006-01-13 04:57:56 |
| Message-ID: | 20060113045756.GA88336@winnie.fuhr.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 11:21:28PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> plpgsql is not very good about reserving words "minimally", ie, not
> treating a word as a keyword outside the context where the keyword
> is meaningful.
>
> This could probably be fixed, or at least greatly reduced, with some
> flex/bison hacking. Anyone up for it?
Possibly. Would it involve much more than what the main parser's
grammar does with unreserved_keyword and friends? I suppose this
ought to move to pgsql-hackers.
--
Michael Fuhr
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-01-13 05:10:29 | Re: [SQL] info is a reserved word? |
| Previous Message | ITAGAKI Takahiro | 2006-01-13 04:47:57 | Re: Overflow of bgwriter's request queue |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-01-13 05:10:29 | Re: [SQL] info is a reserved word? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-01-13 04:21:28 | Re: info is a reserved word? |