Re: Common Table Expressions (WITH RECURSIVE) patch

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Common Table Expressions (WITH RECURSIVE) patch
Date: 2008-09-17 04:48:29
Message-ID: 638.1221626909@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message KaiGai Kohei 2008-09-17 04:55:23 Re: Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches (for CommitFest:Sep)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-09-17 04:36:53 Re: [PATCHES] libpq events patch (with sgml docs)