From: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Gavin Sherry" <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, "Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BETWEEN SYMMETRIC/ASYMMETRIC |
Date: | 2002-04-11 03:00:11 |
Message-ID: | GNELIHDDFBOCMGBFGEFOOEBFCCAA.chriskl@familyhealth.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> > Also, Tom (or anyone): in regards to your previous email,
> should I just go
> > back to using opt_symmetry to shorten the number of productions, since I
> > have to make them reserved words anyway?
>
> Might as well. No point in writing more productions if it doesn't buy
> anything.
Since it's really just two ways of writing the same thing, wouldn't bison
just produce the exact same C code? I'll rewrite it anyway for elegance,
but just wondering...
> BTW, I've forgotten whether your patch is purely syntactic or not,
> but I'd really like to see someone fix things so that BETWEEN has its
> own expression node tree type and is not expanded into some ugly
> "A>=B and A<=C" equivalent. This would (a) allow it to be
> reverse-listed reasonably, and (b) eliminate redundant evaluations of
> the subexpressions.
It is purely syntactic. Anyone want to give me a quick hint on how to make
a new node tree type for BETWEEN? What does reverse-listing mean as well?
Chris
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2002-04-11 03:03:09 | Re: help with bison |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-04-11 02:54:14 | Re: help with bison |