Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice
Date: 2000-11-28 14:49:37
Message-ID: 14618.975422977@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-novice

Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
> select ('today', interval '1 day') OVERLAPS ('yesterday', interval '18
> hours');

> (the second one fails). Now that I look, this breakage was introduced in
> March when "we" expunged operators allowed as identifiers (Tom Lane and
> I have blood on our hands on this one ;) See gram.y around line 5409.

I see it does fail, but I'm at a complete loss to understand why,
especially given that the first case still works. The grammar looks
perfectly fine AFAICT. Can you explain what's wrong here?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-11-28 15:09:57 Re: is it a bug?
Previous Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-11-28 14:48:21 Re: [HACKERS] is it a bug?

Browse pgsql-novice by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-11-28 16:14:59 Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice
Previous Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-11-28 08:06:49 Re: Re: FWD: tinterval vs interval on pgsql-novice