Re: is syntax columname(tablename) necessary still?
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: is syntax columname(tablename) necessary still? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTi=0sYJeJXUgXAmnKK-3NE6vN0M_T4tcg_hSN+9f@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: is syntax columname(tablename) necessary still? (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: is syntax columname(tablename) necessary still?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote: >> They name to be type_func_keywords, perhaps, but not fully reserved. >> And they'd still need that treatment anyway. Even if cube(whatever) >> can't mean "extract a column called cube from table whatever", it can >> still mean "call a function called cube on a column called whatever". > > look to gram.y, please. > > we can use a > > GROUP BY CUBE(expr, ..) > GROUP BY func_name(expr, ..) > > so these rules are in conflict, because func_name can have a > type_func_keywords symbols. So we have to significantly rewrite a > rules about func call or CUBE and ROLLUP have to be a reserved words. > There isn't any other possibility. I understand that you have to make CUBE and ROLLUP reserved words. But you would still have to do that even if we changed $SUBJECT. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: