From: | "Hiroshi Saito" <z-saito(at)guitar(dot)ocn(dot)ne(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: "AS" by the syntax of table reference.(8.4 proposal) |
Date: | 2008-02-09 00:54:28 |
Message-ID: | 055b01c86ab6$53781570$0301a8c0@HP22720319231 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Sorry, I'm sleeping.
Thanks Gregory-san. and, Tom-san.
> Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> But yeah, c_expr isn't enough. We really need {a,b}_expr sans postfix
>> expressions.
>
> How's that going to help? As long as postfix operators exist at all,
>
> SELECT a + b, ...
>
> is going to be ambiguous, and no amount of grammar magic changes that.
> We could force the parser into using one interpretation or the other,
> but it would still be wrong for some folks.
Ah yes, {a,b}_expr is very difficult.....Then, I am asking for compromise.
at the "c_expr", case after the patch..
postgres=# select a+b from n;
?column?
----------
5
(1 row)
postgres=# select a+b AS "FIELD" from n;
FIELD
-------
5
(1 row)
postgres=# select a+b "FIELD" from n;
ERROR: syntax error at or near ""FIELD""
LINE 1: select a+b "FIELD" from n;
^
postgres=# select (a+b) "FIELD" from n;
FIELD
-------
5
(1 row)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hiroshi Saito | 2008-02-09 01:10:51 | Re: "AS" by the syntax of table reference.(8.4 proposal) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-02-09 00:16:33 | Re: "AS" by the syntax of table reference.(8.4 proposal) |