Re: Re: UNION JOIN vs UNION SELECT - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Chris
Subject Re: Re: UNION JOIN vs UNION SELECT
Date
Msg-id 39AB0AAF.C675F7C7@nimrod.itg.telecom.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to UNION JOIN vs UNION SELECT  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Re: UNION JOIN vs UNION SELECT
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Chris <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au> writes:
> >> the grammar is just plain not LR(1) unless you
> >> count UNION JOIN as a single token.
> 
> > Would it be bad to make UNION JOIN as a single token?
> 
> That's exactly the solution I'm proposing.  However, it's pretty painful
> to make the lexer do it directly (consider intervening comments, for
> example)

Comments are a pain in the parser. What if something prior to the lexer
filtered out comments before either the lexer or parser could see them?
Would it be as easy as s/--.*// before the lexer?


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: UNION JOIN vs UNION SELECT
Next
From: t-ishii@sra.co.jp
Date:
Subject: Re: when does CREATE VIEW not create a view?