Re: New CORRESPONDING clause design

Hi

2017-03-14 16:33 GMT+01:00 Surafel Temesgen <surafel3000(at)gmail(dot)com>:

>
> hi
>
> Some errors are related to just CORRESPONDING without any columns. So
>> using expr doesn't help here. So parse node CORRESPONDING can solve both
>> issues.
>>
> In current implementation pointing to a node means pointing to a node’s
> first element so I don’t think we can be able to point to CORRESPONDING
> without any columns
>
> I find out that there is already a node prepare for the case called
> A_Const.
> The attached patch use that node
>

It looks better

I fixed format of comments and some too long lines.

all regress tests passed

I have not any objection - I'll mark this patch as ready for commiter

Regards

Pavel

>
> Regards
> Surafel
>