From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Radu-Adrian Popescu <radu.popescu@aldratech.com>
Cc: Achilleus Mantzios <achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: SQL function parse error ?
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 09:48:01 -0500
Message-ID: <843.1042210081@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1042208818.2008.83.camel@camel>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301091723290.22067-100000@matrix.gatewaynet.com>
<777.1042127 826@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<006301c2b7fc$41e58e40$0600a8c0@rpopescu>
<1042145043.2007.31.camel@camel>
<000b01c2b888$79e18100$0600a8c0@rpopescu>
<1042208818.2008.83.camel@camel>
Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> ... I still
> would like to see answered is whether oracle or others support >$ as an
> operator, or if the sql spec has anything to say on the matter.
The SQL spec does not have the concept of user-definable operators at
all, so it provides no useful guidance about the set of characters that
ought to be allowed in operator names (except, obviously, that we must
include every character actually used in a SQL-standard operator).
Oracle reportedly treats $ as an identifier character, so I don't think
they could consider it an operator character.
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, xzilla@users.sourceforge.net, radu.popescu@aldratech.com, achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com
Subject: Re: SQL function parse error ?
In-Reply-To: <843.1042210081@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