Re: [HACKERS] Beta for 4:30AST ... ?

Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
>> It seems that allowing something like
>> bit\ varying
>> in the bootstrap scanner will solve the problem where it's being caused.
>> Internal type names should go away, not accumulate. ;)

> I'm not sure that I agree that multi-word character types are required
> internally. Somehow that seems to just push the problem of
> SQL92-specific syntax to another part of the code.

It doesn't push it anywhere: you still have the problem that the parser
expects type names to be single tokens, not multiple tokens, and any
exceptions need to be special-cased in the grammar. We can handle that
for the few multi-word type names decreed by SQL92. But allowing
internal type names to be multi-word as well will create more headaches
in other places (even if it doesn't make the grammar ambiguous, which
it well might). I think the bootstrap scanner would just be the tip of
the iceberg...

regards, tom lane