| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)trust(dot)ee> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Meskes <Michael_Meskes(at)topmail(dot)de> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Keywords |
| Date: | 1999-02-10 15:23:51 |
| Message-ID: | 36C1A487.9C137D68@trust.ee |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Meskes wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 1999 at 02:28:10AM +0000, Thomas G. Lockhart wrote:
> > However, it is handled in a special way: in contexts where one would
> > expect a type name, "int" is translated to "int4" explicitly (very early
> > on, from gram.y). Otherwise it is not translated.
>
> And int4 is reserved? Is is not in keywords.c though.
No it's not, it just happens that it is already defined as a type,
and in postgres defining a table also defines a type.
In some senses table and type in postgres mean the same thing.
----------------------
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-02-10 15:25:44 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] A mistake generates strange result |
| Previous Message | Thomas G. Lockhart | 1999-02-10 15:11:38 | Re: [HACKERS] Keywords |