pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
To: John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Non-decimal integer literals
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2022 11:31:03 +0100
Message-ID: <b70b15fc-7f8d-5370-21fc-4ec3c154aef3@enterprisedb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFBsxsG4m9qK=vyLAj2DGo3vZ6AC0vRxA4gWtExH5RGP=sPo_Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <b239564c-cad0-b23e-c57e-166d883cb97d@enterprisedb.com>
	<CALNJ-vTmD7DGr9VU1x-Rt9GVJowQeX9t44CDhZJE=EUnp+7FeQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFBsxsEt_CFGk1vBEn=arrDKMFfdryjDHnNvFzpkhh+MktGNKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<0f37d2ec-6689-4d23-7ba5-4d2a73c2666f@enterprisedb.com>
	<577603ec-787b-61b8-23a2-1bd0457ed1c7@enterprisedb.com>
	<be7fb835-abf9-2f5a-de5d-ad946a7d42e1@enterprisedb.com>
	<c42cb38a-ac42-dd92-2935-dce3b9806e26@enterprisedb.com>
	<CA+TgmoZv2Q11P1JbF+ziu1b8vsBpcjfPqXsHMR0hJqSTeLP1xQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<bef9c869-e773-f792-fde2-d7555add2879@enterprisedb.com>
	<CA+TgmoZRJzBe6yKeBpQ2auHndeV-bzygSY=gr0A0KixZ2giKNg@mail.gmail.com>
	<2317133.1643155358@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<97aa22d7-b80f-efa1-f368-3dbf73a15980@enterprisedb.com>
	<CAFBsxsGcgqJ_KO-1=jCUJKK2z5rCh2qsf7=VgNWzTvakLMDyBQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<bc462aff-675b-86e2-46e3-7eaf5ce3e75f@enterprisedb.com>
	<071c40f2-15cf-5db3-8799-dbac041bb881@enterprisedb.com>
	<CAFBsxsG4m9qK=vyLAj2DGo3vZ6AC0vRxA4gWtExH5RGP=sPo_Q@mail.gmail.com>

On 14.11.22 08:25, John Naylor wrote:
> Regarding the patch, it looks good overall. My only suggestion would be 
> to add a regression test for just below and just above overflow, at 
> least for int2.

ok

> Minor nits:
> 
> - * Process {integer}.  Note this will also do the right thing with 
> {decimal},
> + * Process {*integer}.  Note this will also do the right thing with 
> {numeric},
> 
> I scratched my head for a while, thinking this was Flex syntax, until I 
> realized my brain was supposed to do shell-globbing first, at which 
> point I could see it was referring to multiple Flex rules. I'd try to 
> rephrase.

ok

> +T661 Non-decimal integer literals YES SQL:202x draft
> 
> Is there an ETA yet?

March 2023

> Also, it's not this patch's job to do it, but there are at least a half 
> dozen places that open-code turning a hex char into a number. It might 
> be a good easy "todo item" to unify that.

right






view thread (62+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <b70b15fc-7f8d-5370-21fc-4ec3c154aef3@enterprisedb.com>
Permalink:  ../b70b15fc-7f8d-5370-21fc-4ec3c154aef3@enterprisedb.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/b70b15fc-7f8d-5370-21fc-4ec3c154aef3@enterprisedb.com

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com, john.naylor@enterprisedb.com
  Subject: Re: Non-decimal integer literals
  In-Reply-To: <b70b15fc-7f8d-5370-21fc-4ec3c154aef3@enterprisedb.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox