Re: OUTER keyword - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: OUTER keyword
Date
Msg-id AANLkTimf8pA9KSXc6TKa6q9X9XZZgYsZSY66BjyxwDr1@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: OUTER keyword  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: OUTER keyword  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>> On 22.02.2011 16:58, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> It this a TODO?
>
>> If we want to change OUTER, we should just do it now. If not, I don't
>> see a TODO here.
>
> I don't see a good reason to change it.  The SQL standard is perfectly
> clear that OUTER is a fully reserved word.

My vote would be to change it.  We don't normally reserve keywords
unnecessarily.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: OUTER keyword
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Void binary patch