> I suppose it isn't a major problem, but enforcing strict grammar
> helps to show up inadvertent errors. Suppose I have a set of schema
> building files for a whole system; the way I do things, there may be fifty
> or more files, one per table. If one of these gets corrupted in editing
> (perhaps a line gets deleted by mistake) it would be nice to know about it
> through a parser error. Of course, an error may be such that the parser
> won't detect it, but why remove protection by gratuitously departing from
> the standard?
I agree -- while it would be a huge problem, it's a matter of following
the rules.. I don't see any reason why we can't expect users to follow the
proper syntax rules.. I missed the first post so I don't know how the person
who posted this was actually putting the comma there -- perhaps there was a
good reason for it..
Just my $0.02 worth..
-Mitch
