Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> We should only be able to get out of step from the "%_" case, I believe,
> so we should only need to do the first-byte test in that case (which is
> in a different code path from the normal "_" case. Does that seem right?
At least put Assert(IsFirstByte()) in the main path.
I'm a bit suspicious of the separate-path business anyway. Will it do
the right thing with say "%%%_" ?
regards, tom lane
