Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> Yuck. They *were* talking about InterBase, but you're right!
> Didn't realize that scan.l had lost (or never did have) the right
> stuff. Will be fixed before we're out of beta...
I've griped about these boundary conditions before, actually ---
although scan.l does the right thing most of the time with comments,
it has problems if a -- comment is terminated with \r instead of \n
(hence gripes from Windows users), and it also has problems if a --
comment is not terminated with \n before the end of the buffer.
There are some other cases where \r is not taken as equivalent
to \n, also.
Am testing a fix now.
regards, tom lane
