Re: Re: Hand written parsers
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: Hand written parsers |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3127.987145977@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: Hand written parsers (ncm@zembu.com (Nathan Myers)) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: Hand written parsers
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
ncm@zembu.com (Nathan Myers) writes: > Yacc and yacc-like programs are most useful when the target grammar (or > your understanding of it) is not very stable. With Yacc you can make > sweeping changes much more easily; big changes can be a lot of work in > a hand-coded parser. And, in fact, this is precisely the killer reason why we will not switch to a handwritten parser anytime in the foreseeable future. Postgres' grammar is NOT stable. Compare the gram.y files for any two recent releases. I foresee changes at least as large in upcoming releases, btw, as we implement more of SQL92/99 and drop ancient PostQuel-isms. I have some interest in proposals to switch to a better parser-generator tool than yacc ... but yacc has the advantages of being widely available and widely understood. You'd need a pretty significant improvement over yacc to make it worth switching. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: