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

Re: AW: AW: [HACKERS] Re: PostgreSQL reference manual

From: dg(at)illustra(dot)com (David Gould)
To: andreas(dot)zeugswetter(at)telecom(dot)at (Zeugswetter Andreas)
Cc: maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org
Subject: Re: AW: AW: [HACKERS] Re: PostgreSQL reference manual
Date: 1998-03-27 01:04:34
Message-ID: 9803270104.AA24802@hawk.illustra.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andreas:
> >> David Gould writes:
> >> > Consider also not updateing the grammar. The strength of PostgreSQL is that
> >> > functions can be added to work inside the server. These functions can often
> >> > do whatever is being proposed as new syntax.
> >> 
> >> So you want me to not check the syntax while parsing the embedded SQL code?
> >
> >What I think we was suggesting is that we add non-ANSI functionality as
> >function calls rather than grammer changes with keywords.  The only
> >disadvantage is that it is a little more cumbersom, and less intuitive
> >for users.
> 
> but it ** is ** ANSI functionality, look under "role"  (with an O)

Ok, but are we using the ANSI syntax? If so, then I withdraw my objection.
But, if we are adding ANSI functionality with UNIQUE syntax, then why bother
hacking the parser since the functionality can be added with functions.

-dg

David Gould            dg(at)illustra(dot)com           510.628.3783 or 510.305.9468 
Informix Software  (No, really)         300 Lakeside Drive  Oakland, CA 94612
 - Linux. Not because it is free. Because it is better.


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas G. LockhartDate: 1998-03-27 02:47:21
Subject: Re: [QUESTIONS] Using % in a query
Previous:From: David GouldDate: 1998-03-27 01:01:27
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Data type removal

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