From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Why do OLD and NEW have special internal names? |
Date: | 2009-11-06 12:22:55 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f070911060422u4ca59f7fue9cacd8d637084e3@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:02 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> BTW, this brings up another point, which is that up to now it's often
>>> been possible to use plpgsql variable names that conflict with
>>> core-parser reserved words, so long as you didn't need to use the
>>> reserved word with its special meaning. That will stop working when
>>> this patch goes in. Doesn't bother me any, but if anyone thinks it's
>>> a serious problem, speak now.
>
>> Any keyword or just fully reserved keywords?
>
> Anything that's not allowed as a column name will be at issue.
Well, that's not so bad. If it included unreserved keywords I think
that would be more of an issue.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-11-06 14:43:17 | WIP: convert plpgsql to using parser hooks |
Previous Message | Roberto Mello | 2009-11-06 12:06:12 | Re: Why do OLD and NEW have special internal names? |