From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Jan Wieck <wieck@debis.com>
Cc: goran@kirra.net
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] NULL
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 22:13:59 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <199911300313.WAA25238@candle.pha.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19817.942713416@sss.pgh.pa.us>
> 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 Could it be that this reason is out of date?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...
OK, I assume we are going to dis-allow NULL as a column constraint. We
could allow it but emmit a notice.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
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: pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, wieck@debis.com, goran@kirra.net
Subject: Re: [SQL] NULL
In-Reply-To: <199911300313.WAA25238@candle.pha.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