On 01/17/17 17:17, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> On 17/01/2017 12:07, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
>> 17.01.2017 16:13, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>>
It should be possible to add one or more alternative rules in the
grammar where character set names are used in a way that
On 17/01/2017 12:07, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> 17.01.2017 16:13, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>
>>> It should be possible to add one or more alternative rules in the
>>> grammar where character set names are used in a way that preserves the
>>> backwards compatibility.
>> I believe this is
On 01/17/17 17:06, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 17.01.2017 15:00, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
>> This way reserved word becomes non-reserved. Looks at
>>
>> valid_symbol_name
>> : SYMBOL
>> | non_reserved_word
>> ;
>>
>> followed by list of non_reserved_word-s.
> Including "BINARY"
17.01.2017 16:13, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>> It should be possible to add one or more alternative rules in the
>> grammar where character set names are used in a way that preserves the
>> backwards compatibility.
>
> I believe this is the thing we need to do.
>
> Just something as
17.01.2017 15:00, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> This way reserved word becomes non-reserved. Looks at
>
> valid_symbol_name
> : SYMBOL
> | non_reserved_word
> ;
>
> followed by list of non_reserved_word-s.
Including "BINARY" into caused a lot of reduce/reduce
conflicts.
--
WBR,
On 01/17/17 16:54, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 17.01.2017 14:13, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>> I believe this is the thing we need to do.
>>
>> Just something as "identifier | BINARY" rule.
> Better would be something like "identifier | ", but I have
> no idea how
> to do it with
17.01.2017 14:13, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> I believe this is the thing we need to do.
>
> Just something as "identifier | BINARY" rule.
Better would be something like "identifier | ", but I have no
idea how
to do it with btyacc.
--
WBR, SD.
On 17/01/2017 10:40, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
> On 2017-01-17 12:09, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
>> 17.01.2017 13:57, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>>> Yep? Ok to break lots of applications?
>> We cannot make all the new tokens non-reserved, it's practically
>> impossible. BINARY/VARBINARY are
On 2017-01-17 12:09, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> 17.01.2017 13:57, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>>
>> Yep? Ok to break lots of applications?
>
> We cannot make all the new tokens non-reserved, it's practically
> impossible. BINARY/VARBINARY are standard and reserved per SQL spec, so
>
17.01.2017 13:19, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> This does the trick, the build succeeds then.
Good to know, thanks. I'll create pull request.
--
WBR, SD.
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:30:53AM +0100, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 17.01.2017 9:47, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> > The offending line seems to be
> >
> > CREATE DOMAIN PLG$PASSWD AS VARCHAR(64) CHARACTER SET BINARY;
> >
> > I bisected it to commit
> >
> > 7b9b408658e1 Implementation of
17.01.2017 11:57, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> Yep? Ok to break lots of applications?
I, personally, always used "CHARACTER SET OCTETS" and never even heard about
charset
"BINARY".
--
WBR, SD.
--
On 17/01/2017 08:30, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 17.01.2017 9:47, Michal Kubecek wrote:
>> The offending line seems to be
>>
>> CREATE DOMAIN PLG$PASSWD AS VARCHAR(64) CHARACTER SET BINARY;
>>
>> I bisected it to commit
>>
>> 7b9b408658e1 Implementation of CORE-5064 (#73)
>>
>> I didn't look
17.01.2017 9:47, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> The offending line seems to be
>
> CREATE DOMAIN PLG$PASSWD AS VARCHAR(64) CHARACTER SET BINARY;
>
> I bisected it to commit
>
> 7b9b408658e1 Implementation of CORE-5064 (#73)
>
> I didn't look too deep but maybe newly introduced type "binary" collides
14 matches
Mail list logo
