| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Marko Kreen <marko(at)l-t(dot)ee>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] binary operators on integers |
| Date: | 2001-01-23 22:43:07 |
| Message-ID: | 8142.980289787@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
I wrote:
> Given the infrequency of use of postfix operators compared to prefix,
> I am inclined to think that we should change the grammar to make the
> latter easier to use at the expense of the former. On the other hand,
> it seems there's a pretty large risk of backwards-incompatibility here.
> Comments?
I backed away from part of the proposed patch --- changing the
precedence of all the prefix-operator productions to UMINUS would
probably break people's queries. But I've applied the part that
changes the behavior of a_expr Op Op a_expr. This will now be
parsed as an infix operator followed by a prefix operator.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-01-23 23:01:19 | Re: Does Oracle store values in indices? |
| Previous Message | Mikheev, Vadim | 2001-01-23 22:20:34 | RE: Does Oracle store values in indices? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-01-24 00:52:36 | Re: patch for src/backend/main/main.c |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-01-23 21:46:12 | Re: [PATCHES] Re: Re: [HACKERS] ODBC Driver int8 Patch |