Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Ungraceful handling of fatal flex errors

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: dom(at)idealx(dot)com
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Ungraceful handling of fatal flex errors
Date: 2001-01-29 14:43:35
Message-ID: 24259.980779415@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
dom(at)idealx(dot)com, dom(at)idealx(dot)com writes:
>> #define fprintf(file,fmt,msg)  elog(FATAL, "%s", (msg))

>   Meaning no disrespect : yuck... IMHO this is asking for trouble
> whenever someone decides to use another yacc.

This is flex, not yacc, and our lexer has been flex-only for a long
time.  It's possible that the hack would break in a future version
of flex, but I doubt it.  What else is a lexer going to use fprintf
for?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-01-29 14:48:21
Subject: Re: new version of contrib-intarray
Previous:From: Oleg BartunovDate: 2001-01-29 14:19:27
Subject: Re: new version of contrib-intarray

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group