Re: Re: Hand written parsers

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: Hand written parsers
Date: 2001-04-13 07:12:57
Message-ID: 3127.987145977@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

ncm(at)zembu(dot)com (Nathan Myers) writes:
> Yacc and yacc-like programs are most useful when the target grammar (or
> your understanding of it) is not very stable. With Yacc you can make
> sweeping changes much more easily; big changes can be a lot of work in
> a hand-coded parser.

And, in fact, this is precisely the killer reason why we will not switch
to a handwritten parser anytime in the foreseeable future. Postgres'
grammar is NOT stable. Compare the gram.y files for any two recent
releases. I foresee changes at least as large in upcoming releases,
btw, as we implement more of SQL92/99 and drop ancient PostQuel-isms.

I have some interest in proposals to switch to a better parser-generator
tool than yacc ... but yacc has the advantages of being widely
available and widely understood. You'd need a pretty significant
improvement over yacc to make it worth switching.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Butler 2001-04-13 08:00:21 Re: ALTER TABLE MODIFY COLUMN
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-04-13 06:57:26 Re: NUMERIC type efficiency problem