Re: Grammar guidelines in Postgres - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Aleksander Alekseev
Subject Re: Grammar guidelines in Postgres
Date
Msg-id CAJ7c6TNghk5btyKHi5L8YbbthbuHyNwfPwwJwQxjONXToVgd0w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Grammar guidelines in Postgres  (Harjyot Bagga <hsbagga28.dev@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

> Thank you for your reply. I am aware about these conflicts, but thank you for the explanation.
> My question is specific to Postgres. Do we have a set of guidelines we keep in mind while writing grammar rules while
introducingnew features to postgres? 
>
> One such suggestion or rule for example is the Postgres does not support Postfix operators. So whenever a new feature
isintroduced developers make sure that they do not add a postfix operators in their grammar. Just like that are there
anyother further rules or suggestions compiled by post hackers and maintainers? 

I believe you wanted to reply to the mailing list, not to me directly.
Please use the "Reply to All" button.

Do the postfix operators you mention exist in the SQL standard?

--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Aleksander Alekseev
Date:
Subject: Re: Recommended books for admin
Next
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_wal_summary_contents() and pg_walsummary may return different results on the same WAL summary file