Re: AW: AW: [HACKERS] Re: PostgreSQL reference manual
David Gould <dg@illustra.com>
From: dg@illustra.com (David Gould)
To: andreas.zeugswetter@telecom.at (Zeugswetter Andreas)
Cc: maillist@candle.pha.pa.us, pgsql-hackers@hub.org
Date: 1998-03-27T01:04:34Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andreas: > >> David Gould writes: > >> > Consider also not updateing the grammar. The strength of PostgreSQL is that > >> > functions can be added to work inside the server. These functions can often > >> > do whatever is being proposed as new syntax. > >> > >> So you want me to not check the syntax while parsing the embedded SQL code? > > > >What I think we was suggesting is that we add non-ANSI functionality as > >function calls rather than grammer changes with keywords. The only > >disadvantage is that it is a little more cumbersom, and less intuitive > >for users. > > but it ** is ** ANSI functionality, look under "role" (with an O) Ok, but are we using the ANSI syntax? If so, then I withdraw my objection. But, if we are adding ANSI functionality with UNIQUE syntax, then why bother hacking the parser since the functionality can be added with functions. -dg David Gould dg@illustra.com 510.628.3783 or 510.305.9468 Informix Software (No, really) 300 Lakeside Drive Oakland, CA 94612 - Linux. Not because it is free. Because it is better.