Re: Re: BIT/BIT VARYING status

Adriaan Joubert writes:

> > 2. We don't handle <bit string> and <hex string> literals correctly;
> > the scanner converts them into integers which seems quite at variance
> > with the spec's semantics.
>
> This is still a problem that needs to be fixed.

I have gotten the B'1001'-style syntax to work, but the zpbit_in function
rejects the input. You need to change the *_in functions to accept input
in the form of a string of only 1's and 0's. Also, the output functions
should print 1's and 0's.

I'm somewhat confused about the <hex string>s; according to the standard
they might also be a BLOB literal. I'd say we get the binary version
working first, and then wonder about this.

> Also, it the parser did not seem to be too happy about the 'position'
> syntax,

The parser converted 'position(a in b)' into 'strpos(b, a)'. I changed it
so it converts it into 'position(b, a)' and aliased the other functions
appropriately. I changed the order of your arguments for that.

> I noticed that the substring syntax does not seem to work:

Similar issue as above. Should work now.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://yi.org/peter-e/