Re: [HACKERS] Bug in gram.y? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas G. Lockhart
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Bug in gram.y?
Date
Msg-id 35C66D7A.D614E4C7@alumni.caltech.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Bug in gram.y?  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Bug in gram.y?
List pgsql-hackers
> > it seems that it doesn't accept a createdb with the
> > option location = ... but without the option encoding = ...

I think the code is sub-optimal for a couple of reasons:

1) LOCATION must be the first argument, ENCODING must be the second. The
number and order of any options should be flexible.

2) the options should have a comma delimiter between them. Currently
they do not. To introduce the comma delimiter will require restructuring
that part of the parsing, but isn't a big deal.

I'm pretty sure that the options can be specified individually, but it
does not generalize well. The two specific problems above should be
considered fatal for a final version :/

I've worked through problems like this for other SQL92 syntax, and can
probably fix up this one too. Will put it on my list unless someone else
wants it...

                        - Tom

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Roland Roberts
Date:
Subject: PostgreSQL catalogues: finding the primary key
Next
From: t-ishii@sra.co.jp
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Bug in gram.y?