RE: [HACKERS] Just another question

Yes, I agree. So I let it like it is. But I think this has to be added
to the docs.

Michael

--
Dr. Michael Meskes, Project-Manager    | topsystem Systemhaus GmbH
meskes@topsystem.de                    | Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20
meskes@debian.org                      | 52146 Wuerselen
Go SF49ers! Go Rhein Fire!             | Tel: (+49) 2405/4670-44
Use Debian GNU/Linux!                  | Fax: (+49) 2405/4670-10

> -----Original Message-----
> From:    Thomas G. Lockhart [SMTP:lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu]
> Sent:    Thursday, April 23, 1998 2:56 PM
> To:    Meskes, Michael
> Cc:    PostgreSQL Hacker
> Subject:    Re: [HACKERS] Just another question
>
> > > > I just noticed that there is an operator '=:'. What is it used
> > > > for?
> > > ?? I don't see it here.
> > But scan.l returns Op.
>
> Oh, it is an _allowed_ operator symbol combination, if someone were to
> define an operator using it. But it isn't pre-defined anywhere, is it?
>
>
> And, it should be OK to require spaces to help delimit your embedded
> stuff; that is, "=:" is interpreted as a possible operator, while "=
> :"
> (with space) is "equals embedded variable"...
>
> I'd hate to keep removing single characters from the allowed operator
> character set when we get syntax conflicts like this. We'll end up
> with
> only the SQL92-allowed operator symbols before long :)
>
>                       - Tom