Re: Re: gram.y PROBLEM with UNDER

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Chris Bitmead <chris(at)bitmead(dot)com>, Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: gram.y PROBLEM with UNDER
Date: 2000-05-25 16:12:12
Message-ID: 200005251612.MAA25387@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> If you don't get rid of those then your parser will behave in surprising
> ways. So far you have noticed the fallout from only one of those
> conflicts, but every one of them is a potential bug. Be advised that
> gram.y patches that create unresolved conflicts will *not* be accepted.

Yes, even I don't apply those, though they say I never met a patch I
didn't like. :-)

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark R 2000-05-25 16:18:14
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-05-25 16:11:02 Re: vacuum analyze feedback