Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 04:44:13PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
>
>>Is the intention here to make PSM a first class language (i.e. handled
>>by the main dbengine scanner/parser) of just another PL? If the latter
>>it seems far less worth doing. Doing this as a first class language,
>>however, would be great, just great.
>>
>>
>
>I've seen some example code on the EnterpriseDB website using their SPL
>language, and it doesn't seem to be handled like "just another PL". The
>function body does not look at all like quoted strings, as in our
>regular PLs. I don't know how they did it, but I don't think they added
>support for the whole language to the main parser.
>
>
>
It could be done by putting the SPL parser in front of the SQL parser.
Maybe Luss will tell us how it was done ;-)
cheers
andrew
