On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 06:45:25PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Separating "CREATE TABLE AS EXECUTE" from ExecuteStmt would be cleaner
> but I avoided to change the syntax tree. Instead the attched make
> distinction of $$.type of ExecuteStmt between NULL and "" to use to
> notify the returned name is name of a prepared statement or a full
> statement.
I am not so sure, and using an empty string makes the code a bit
harder to follow. How would that look with the grammar split you have
in mind? Maybe that makes the code more consistent with the PREPARE
block a couple of lines above?
--
Michael
