On Sat, Dec 16, 2000 at 12:29:16AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> But does anyone know what they do want to know?
> The list of PostgreSQL reserved words seems to be the only thing I can see
> as definitely essential. But which is more important: The list of words
> that are reserved in PG but *not* reserved in SQLxx (i.e., what problems
> can I expect when porting stuff to PG), or the opposite (i.e., what words
> should I avoid when writing portable SQL).
If anyone ever gets around to writing an SQL Flagger (as required for
FIPS 127-2 compliance: the US Federal gov't standard that incorporates
SQL92) they'll need the second list: things in PG not in the standard(s)
Open source code is like a natural resource, it's the result of providing
food and sunshine to programmers, and then staying out of their way.
[...] [It] is not going away because it has utility for both the developers
and users independent of economic motivations. Jim Flynn, Sunnyvale, Calif.
In response to
pgsql-docs by date
|Next:||From: Hannu Krosing||Date: 2000-12-16 08:08:48|
|Subject: Re: SQL keywords|
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2000-12-15 23:29:16|
|Subject: SQL keywords|