Re: revised patch for PL/PgSQL table functions - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Neil Conway
Subject Re: revised patch for PL/PgSQL table functions
Date
Msg-id 87n0r6w2fy.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: revised patch for PL/PgSQL table functions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: revised patch for PL/PgSQL table functions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-patches
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> > Here's another improved patch. I got the parser to accept 'RETURN
> > NEXT' properly

> Consider doing it the way that the main parser converts "UNION JOIN"
> into a single token --- viz, there's an outer filter that calls the
> lexer an extra time to look ahead one token when necessary.  Doing this
> in the lexer is really quite messy if you want to do it right (eg,
> deal correctly with comments between the two keywords).

Ah, ok -- thanks for the tip.

I've attached a revised patch: rediffed against CVS HEAD, changed the
RETURN NEXT parsing as suggested by Tom above, and made some more
minor cleanups to PL/PgSQL code.

Cheers,

Neil

--
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC

Attachment

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Joe Conway
Date:
Subject: SRF memory mgmt patch (was [HACKERS] Concern about memory management with SRFs)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Proposed patch for qual pushdown into UNION/INTERSECT