From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pavel Stehule <stehule(at)kix(dot)fsv(dot)cvut(dot)cz>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Denis Lussier <denis(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Implementing SQL/PSM for PG 8.2 |
Date: | 2005-06-28 00:40:41 |
Message-ID: | 42C09C89.3030805@samurai.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jan Wieck wrote:
> The whole parser is a hack that attempts to parse the procedural parts
> of the function but preserving the SQL parts as query strings while
> substituting variables with numbered parameters. That is anything but
> clean. It was the only way I saw at the time of implementation to build
> a parser that automatically supports future changes of the main Postgres
> query language.
I agree the current parser is a hack, but it's difficult to see how else
it could be implemented. One possibility I've mentioned in the past is
to rewrite the main SQL parser by hand (e.g. as a recursive descent
parser), so that we could directly call into the main SQL parser from
the PL/PgSQL parser. I believe that would let us embed SQL in PL/PgSQL
without needing to teach the PL/PgSQL anything about the main SQL
grammar. But of course this has the downside of needing to write and
maintain a recursive descent parser.
Any better ideas?
-Neil
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-06-28 00:55:05 | language handlers in public schema |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2005-06-28 00:28:02 | Re: Implementing SQL/PSM for PG 8.2 |