From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Radu-Adrian Popescu" <radu(dot)popescu(at)aldratech(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: SQL function parse error ? |
Date: | 2003-01-09 14:48:14 |
Message-ID: | 29440.1042123694@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
"Radu-Adrian Popescu" <radu(dot)popescu(at)aldratech(dot)com> writes:
> This is SQL, and people who are using PostgreSql write SQL, not
> whitespace-sensitive SQL, bash or whatever.
Nonsense. SQL syntax is space-sensitive. Or have you successfully
written
SELECTXFROMY;
lately?
There has occasionally been talk of disallowing '$' as a valid character
in operator names, which would eliminate the syntactic ambiguity in this
example. But undoubtedly it would also break a few applications that
use '$' in user-defined operator names, so the proposal hasn't passed
to date.
> Is there any operator named >$ ?
Whether there is one in the standard distribution is quite irrelevant.
It's a valid operator name according to the current rules, and so open
to definition by anyone who wants to.
The most recent discussion I can find about this is the pgsql-hackers
thread "Dollar in identifiers" from Aug 2001, eg
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2001-08/msg00629.php
There didn't seem to be a consensus to change things, so the old
behavior stands, for the moment.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Radu-Adrian Popescu | 2003-01-09 15:05:43 | Re: SQL function parse error ? |
Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2003-01-09 14:18:19 | Re: Postgresql Bug List? |