Re: Why do OLD and NEW have special internal names?

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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?