| From: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Review: UNNEST (and other functions) WITH ORDINALITY |
| Date: | 2013-08-13 20:33:49 |
| Message-ID: | CAM-w4HOfyXg3CcZtMLwbNUYE0x1GO-fxtJXZ0Rri5UBS9vQGCg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Blech. Well, that's why we need to stop hacking the lexer before we shoot a
> hole through our foot that's too large to ignore. But it's not this patch's
> job to fix that problem.
Hm. I thought it was. However it turns out the NULLS FIRST and the
WITH* problems are not exactly analogous. Because NULLS and FIRST are
both unreserved keywords whereas WITH is a reserved keyword the
problems are really different. Whereas WITH can be fixed by going
through all the places in the grammar where WITH appears, NULLS FIRST
really can't be fixed without reserving NULLS.
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-08-13 21:30:45 | TODO request: multi-dimensional arrays in PL/pythonU |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-08-13 20:24:27 | Re: How to create read-only view on 9.3 |