Re: Call for objections: revision of keyword classification

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Call for objections: revision of keyword classification
Date: 2001-11-09 02:48:51
Message-ID: 18535.1005274131@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Can we move the keywords out into another file and somehow pull them
> into gram.y with the proper attributes so they get into all the places
> they need to be with little fiddling?

Thinking about that, it seems like it might be nice to have a master
keyword file that contains just keywords and classifications:

AS Hard-reserved
CASE ColLabel
ABSOLUTE TypeFuncId
BIT ColId

and make some scripts that generate both keyword.c and the list
productions in gram.y automatically. (Among other things, we could stop
trusting manual sorting of the keyword.c entries ...) Peter's
documentation generator would no doubt be a lot happier too --- we
could add indications of SQL92 and SQL99 reserved status to this
master file, for example.

However, right offhand I don't see any equivalent of #include in the
Bison manual, so I'm not sure how the autogenerated list productions
could be included into the hand-maintained part of gram.y. Thoughts?

regards, tom lane

PS: no, I'm *not* suggesting we do this during beta.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Barry Lind 2001-11-09 03:27:18 Re: [HACKERS] MD5-based passwords
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-11-09 02:34:37 Re: Call for objections: revision of keyword classification

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-11-09 04:04:17 Re: Call for objections: revision of keyword classification
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-11-09 02:34:37 Re: Call for objections: revision of keyword classification