On Sun, Aug 11, 2002 at 11:12:57AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Not solved yet. And it's just a matter of time until we run into it with
> > the main parser grammar file as well.
>
> Yeah, I've been worrying about that too. Any idea how close we are to
> trouble in the main grammar?
No idea. The ecpg grammar in the main tree has about 530 rules, while my
actual version is at nearly 550. The main grammar should be at about
440. So there's some room left.
> Plan C would be to devote some work to minimizing the number of states
> in the main grammar (I assume it's number of states that's the problem).
> I doubt anyone's ever tried, so there might be enough low-hanging fruit
> to get ecpg off the hook for awhile.
Actually I already ate the really low-hanging fruit. :-)
I did spend some time to reduce the states, albeit surely not to the
extent possible, but still it will mean quite some work I'm afraid.
Michael
P.S.: No repsonse by bison upstream yet, but I think he's on vacation
this week.
--
Michael Meskes
Michael@Fam-Meskes.De
Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire!
Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!
