Re: Bug with view definitions?

From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Justin Clift <jc(at)telstra(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bug with view definitions?
Date: 2004-07-06 03:26:08
Message-ID: 40EA1BD0.1060702@familyhealth.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>> need_paren = (PRETTY_PAREN(context) ?
>> !IsA(op->rarg, RangeTblRef) : true);
>
>
> In a quick glance this code seems close to completely brain dead :-(
> For one thing, why isn't it making separate determinations about whether
> the left and right inputs of the UNION (resp INTERSECT or EXCEPT)
> operator need to be parenthesized? After that maybe we could figure out
> what the individual decisions need to be.

So what are we going to do about it?

Was it one of the pgAdmin guys who wrote it in the first place?

Chris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-07-06 04:53:48 Re: Bug with view definitions?
Previous Message Marc G. Fournier 2004-07-06 02:13:56 Re: compile errors in new PL/Pler