| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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? |