Re: Upgrading our minimum required flex version for 8.5
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Upgrading our minimum required flex version for 8.5 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 162867790907120805u62086a3eve6006d9b9c3b36c2@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Upgrading our minimum required flex version for 8.5 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
2009/7/12 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes: >> 2009/7/12 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: >>> If we're going to go for reentrancy >>> I think we should fix both components. > >> when we don't use reentrant grammar, then we cannot use main sql parser in SQL? > > It wouldn't be a problem for the immediate application I have in mind, > which is to re-use the core lexer in plpgsql. But it does seem like > it might be a problem down the road as plpgsql gets smarter. > it's bad. I thing so integration main parser into plpgsql should be the most important feature of plpgsql from trapping exception time. I have to ask - we need it necessary reetrant grammer? We need integration only in complilation time - for CREATE FUNCTION statement. Can be nonreetrant grammer problem (but we have to store some info from validation time somewhere - maybe in probin column) ? > regards, tom lane >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: