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

Re: Inprise InterBase(R) 6.0 Now Free and Open Source

From: Chris Bitmead <chrisb(at)nimrod(dot)itg(dot)telstra(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Inprise InterBase(R) 6.0 Now Free and Open Source
Date: 2000-07-26 05:56:12
Message-ID: 397E7D7C.6FA4C5AE@nimrod.itg.telecom.com.au (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> 
> > $ wc InterBase/dsql/parse.y
> >     4217   13639  103059 InterBase/dsql/parse.y
> > $ wc postgresql-7.0.2/src/backend/parser/gram.y
> >     5858   20413  149104 postgresql-7.0.2/src/backend/parser/gram.y
> 
> Hmm. I suspect that I could shrink our gram.y by ~25% just by removing
> comments and C support routines, and by consolidating some execution
> blocks onto fewer lines. Does it look like their parse.y is more dense
> than ours, do they do a lot of postprocessing to eliminate the yacc
> rules, or have we missed the boat on writing the grammar in yacc?
> 
> Just curious; I probably won't look myself since I don't want to run the
> risk of compromising our code and licensing. Or is that not an issue
> with the Inprise license?

I had a bit of a look. There's no obvious reason, just maybe postgres
has a few more comments and a bit more code inside the action blocks. No
obvious problem here.

It would be a pity if we can't look and learn from Interbase in this
instance, because this is one area where there is at least a possibility
of borrowing something useful.

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Karel ZakDate: 2000-07-26 07:04:21
Subject: Re: New Privilege model purposal
Previous:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2000-07-26 05:21:06
Subject: Re: Inprise InterBase(R) 6.0 Now Free and Open Source

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