Re: factorial function/phase out postfix operators? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: factorial function/phase out postfix operators?
Date
Msg-id c5965740-00c0-0d93-8b75-ebfb0fbc7bc4@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: factorial function/phase out postfix operators?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: factorial function/phase out postfix operators?
List pgsql-hackers
On 2020-05-20 01:47, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> However, we do have to have a benefit to show those people whose
>> queries we break.  Hence my insistence on having a working AS fix
>> (or some other benefit) before not after.
> I experimented with this a bit more, and came up with the attached.
> It's not a working patch, just a set of grammar changes that Bison
> is happy with.  (Getting to a working patch would require fixing the
> various build infrastructure that knows about the keyword classification,
> which seems straightforward but tedious.)

What I was hoping to get out of this was to resolve some of the weird 
precedence hacks that were blamed on postfix operators.  But building on 
your patch, the best I could achieve was

-%nonassoc  IDENT GENERATED NULL_P PARTITION RANGE ROWS GROUPS PRECEDING 
FOLLOWING CUBE ROLLUP
+%nonassoc  IDENT PARTITION RANGE ROWS GROUPS PRECEDING FOLLOWING CUBE 
ROLLUP

which is a pretty poor yield.

Maybe this isn't worth it after all.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: SimpleLruTruncate() mutual exclusion
Next
From: David Gilman
Date:
Subject: Re: Warn when parallel restoring a custom dump without data offsets