pg.ddx.io  pgsql-sql@postgresql.org mailing list archive  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
Cc: Achilleus Mantzios <achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
Cc: Radu-Adrian Popescu <radu.popescu@aldratech.com>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: SQL function parse error ?
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 12:17:15 -0500
Message-ID: <5570.1042132635@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030109085635.I92199-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
References: <20030109085635.I92199-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com>

Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com> writes:
> Although the rules could be similar to those for + and - at the end of
> operator strings (no $ at the end of an operator unless it contains
> characters not normally in SQL92 operators).  I'm not sure that
> behavior is sensible either, but if someone wanted to
> do it for their own installation it's about a 2 line patch.

It could be done that way.  But given that "$" already has one weird
special case in the operator name rules (ie, it can't be the only
character of an operator name), I feel that we'd be making things overly
complicated.

The proposal back in Aug 2001 was to remove "$" from the set of operator
name characters altogether (which would allow us to use it in
identifiers instead, improving Oracle compatibility).  I originally
objected to that idea on backwards-compatibility grounds, but I'm
leaning more and more to the view that it's the right thing to do.

I've re-opened the thread on pgsql-hackers about this, and we'll see
whether any consensus emerges this time.

			regards, tom lane



view thread (19+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <5570.1042132635@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../5570.1042132635@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/5570.1042132635@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

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-sql@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com, achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com, radu.popescu@aldratech.com
  Subject: Re: SQL function parse error ?
  In-Reply-To: <5570.1042132635@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