Re: Common Table Expressions (WITH RECURSIVE) patch

2008/9/17 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>>> Do we really have to make RECURSIVE a fully reserved keyword?
>
>> According to the standard, RECURSIVE is a reserved keyword, I believe.
>
> Sure, but our general rule is to make keywords no more reserved than
> is absolutely necessary to make the bison grammar unambiguous. I
> haven't tested, but I'm thinking that if WITH is fully reserved then
> RECURSIVE shouldn't have to be.

I am not sure, if these rule is good. Somebody who develop on
postgresql should have a problems when they will be port to other
databases in future. Reserved words in standards should be respected.

regards
Pavel Stehule

>
> regards, tom lane
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>