Re: [HACKERS] Associative Operators? (Was: Re: [NOVICE] Out of frying pan, into fire)

From: "D'Arcy" "J(dot)M(dot)" Cain <darcy(at)druid(dot)net>
To: maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us (Bruce Momjian)
Cc: clark(dot)evans(at)manhattanproject(dot)com, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Associative Operators? (Was: Re: [NOVICE] Out of frying pan, into fire)
Date: 1999-03-16 22:36:58
Message-ID: m10N2SI-0000cFC@druid.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thus spake Bruce Momjian
> > I looked at pg_operator and didn't see any flag to mark
> > an operator as 'associative'. Perhaps if we added a flag
> > like this, the re-write system could be modified to handle
> > cases like this.
>
> My guess is that we should auto-left-associate functions like || if no
> parens are present. It would be a small change to the parser.

And wouldn't require a dump/reload.

--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at){druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 424 2871 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Clark Evans 1999-03-16 22:42:04 Re: [HACKERS] Associative Operators? (Was: Re: [NOVICE] Out of frying pan, into fire)
Previous Message Clark Evans 1999-03-16 22:34:57 Re: [HACKERS] Associative Operators? (Was: Re: [NOVICE] Out of frying pan, into fire)