From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: wieck@debis.com
Cc: pgman@candle.pha.pa.us
Cc: goran@kirra.net
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] NULL
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 19:50:16 -0500
Message-ID: <19817.942713416@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m11nVrB-0003kLC@orion.SAPserv.Hamburg.dsh.de>
wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) writes:
> I can't see any shift/reduce conflicts if I place a
> | NULL_P
> case into the ColConstraintElem: definition right between the
> | DEFAULT b_expr
> and
> | NOT NULL_P
> cases. Could it be that this reason is out of date?
Could be. I remember tweaking the ColConstraint grammar to avoid
shift-reduce conflicts with NOT NULL, and it might be that that got
rid of the problem with NULL as well.
It's still not legal under the SQL92 spec, though, and I'd hate to see
us give up anything else in order to allow a content-free NULL spec to
be added...
regards, tom lane
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, wieck@debis.com, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, goran@kirra.net
Subject: Re: [SQL] NULL
In-Reply-To: <19817.942713416@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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