Re: massive quotes?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: massive quotes?
Date: 2003-09-11 16:53:59
Message-ID: 28339.1063299239@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Uh, the problem with long keywords is that you are then requiring the
> _parser_ to identify those keywords, and at that point, the entire text
> between the keywords has been sliced up by the lexer, which will
> certainly make it a mess. I might be wrong that we can even use more
> then two characters for the start of quote string

You're wrong. We can use anything we like for the start of the quote
string; flex is quite capable of recognizing fixed strings, and even
variable ones. I'd prefer to avoid expecting it to handle
up/downcasing, I think, but there is no technical reason that the
delimiter couldn't look like a keyword.

My objection to the proposal FUNCTIONBODY is that it makes it look like
the feature is only useful in CREATE FUNCTION. In point of fact, the
quoting facility could be used to construct any SQL string literal. The
comparison points I am thinking about are shell here-documents and
Perl quoting conventions, both of which are used for many things.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-09-11 16:57:14 Re: massive quotes?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-09-11 16:40:47 Re: massive quotes?