Re: Non-decimal integer literals - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Non-decimal integer literals
Date
Msg-id 40c4f3a1-5b15-3e17-763e-18c95affa8e9@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Non-decimal integer literals  (Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 07.09.21 13:50, Zhihong Yu wrote:
>     On 16.08.21 17:32, John Naylor wrote:
>      > The one thing that jumped out at me on a cursory reading is
>      > the {integer} rule, which seems to be used nowhere except to
>      > call process_integer_literal, which must then inspect the token
>     text to
>      > figure out what type of integer it is. Maybe consider 4 separate
>      > process_*_literal functions?
> 
>     Agreed, that can be done in a simpler way.  Here is an updated patch.
> 
> Hi,
> Minor comment:
> 
> +SELECT int4 '0o112';
> 
> Maybe involve digits of up to 7 in the octal test case.

Good point, here is a lightly updated patch.

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski
Date:
Subject: Re: Couldn't we mark enum_in() as immutable?
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Non-decimal integer literals