On 23/03/2008, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Working through this patch now. I found one thing that seems to be
> a mistake (probably an overenthusiastic search&replace): the patch
> changes
> - {"iy", 2, dch_date, DCH_IY, TRUE},
> to
> + {"iyear", 2, DCH_IY, TRUE},
>
> The removal of dch_date is intended, but surely the keyword should
> still be "iy". I'm proceeding on that assumption, but if this change
> was actually intended, please explain.
>
Nice catch. Not sure how that got in there, but your theory about a
search & replace gone awry seems the most likely.
Now that the functions have been refactored, I'm looking forward to
getting back into improving the sanity checking in to_date.
Cheers,
BJ
