> >> It's a grammar problem. in_expr_nodes and not_in_expr_nodes expect
> >> the elements of the IN-list to be AexprConst ... I wonder why not
> >> a_expr instead? Might be a reduce conflict, but I bet we could at
> >> least use b_expr. Thomas, any comments?
> Indeed, there is no reduce conflict created by using a_expr, so I went
> ahead and committed it. Also tidied the list-generating code a bit.
Great. Did you fix all the places where IN (values) is allowed? I was
doing that, but will merge your fixes...
- Thomas
--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California