Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> But since the problematic word in your case is not CALL but SELECT, I can
> tell you right away with relative certainty that it will not be possible
> to change the parser to accept SELECT as an identifier in all contexts
> without butchering the grammar beyond reason.
You can drop the "without" qualifier ;-) --- it's not possible period.
Counterexample:
SELECT (SELECT (3)) FROM foo;
Is the second SELECT a (rather vacuous) sub-select, or is it a call of a
function named SELECT?
If you've got a really strong urge to use some keyword as an identifier,
that's what double quotes are for. But the SQL syntax does require a
lot of keywords to be reserved. I believe that we are actually more
permissive in this respect than the SQL spec expects us to be.
regards, tom lane
