Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected

Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm not set on it --- fix it as you suggested.

Attached is a patch that implements this. I'm not especially happy about
the implementation: defining _two_ local macros (that both
doubly-evaluate one of their arguments) is pretty ugly, but I didn't see
a cleaner alternative -- suggestions welcome.

This patch fixes the stack overrun. Since we now pass the length of the
working space into ParseDateTime(), it is also easy to fix Mark's bug: I
just increased the size of the interval_in() working buffer to 256
bytes. I didn't touch any of the other input buffer sizes, although that
shouldn't be taken as a vote of confidence that they are correct :) At
least the consequence of an insufficiently-large buffer is limited to
rejecting otherwise valid input, rather than potentially scribbling on
the stack.

-Neil