Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 17/12/2018 23:05, Tom Lane wrote:
>> [ pokes at that for a bit ] The logic here is a bit denser than
>> one could wish, but here's a draft patch that seems to get the
>> job done. It passes check-world, which isn't conclusive but
>> at least suggests that this doesn't break anything.
> This looks good to me. I can't think of any other syntax scenarios that
> it needs to address.
Pushed, thanks for checking!
regards, tom lane