Re: Re: gram.y PROBLEM with UNDER

From: "Ross J(dot) Reedstrom" <reedstrm(at)rice(dot)edu>
To: Postgres Hackers List <hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: gram.y PROBLEM with UNDER
Date: 2000-05-25 20:39:23
Message-ID: 20000525153923.C24674@rice.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, May 25, 2000 at 12:12:12PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > If you don't get rid of those then your parser will behave in surprising
> > ways. So far you have noticed the fallout from only one of those
> > conflicts, but every one of them is a potential bug. Be advised that
> > gram.y patches that create unresolved conflicts will *not* be accepted.
>
> Yes, even I don't apply those, though they say I never met a patch I
> didn't like. :-)

Bruce, your going to _make_ me grovel through the archives, and prove
that you were the first one to say that aren't you?

Ross
;-)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2000-05-25 20:49:21 Re: Re: gram.y PROBLEM with UNDER
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-05-25 19:54:40 Re: vacuum analyze feedback