> On 18-Jun-99 Michael Meskes wrote:
> >> It doesn't work (in 6.4.2 and earlier, at least) without that 'IN'.
> >> In checking through the test source in the 6.5 version (directory
> >> <source root>/src/interfaces/ecpg/test), I notice that the
> >> 'IN' is still included in all the FETCH statements. I don't know why I
> >
> > The standard wants to see IN. Simply omitting it wouldn't even work with our
> > parser. It creates a shift/reduce conflict. Of course we could fix that but
> > I doubt adding a non-standard feature is worth that effort.
Excuse me -- what's wrong with shift/reduce conflicts? I have over a
hundred of those in one of my applications.
--Gene
