Hi,
I mentioned this before, but no-one responded to it. This page,
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/sql-syntax-lexical.html, has
some confusing text. It talks about the fact that comments can be
included in SQL, then the next sentence says "For example.." followed
by an example without comments in.
I think the sentence is in the wrong place, so have moved it to a less
confusing location in the attached patch.
Thanks
--
Thom Brown
Registered Linux user: #516935
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/syntax.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/syntax.sgml
index 595314b..9f91939 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/syntax.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/syntax.sgml
@@ -47,12 +47,6 @@
special character is adjacent to some other token type).
</para>
- <para>
- Additionally, <firstterm>comments</firstterm> can occur in SQL
- input. They are not tokens, they are effectively equivalent to
- whitespace.
- </para>
-
<para>
For example, the following is (syntactically) valid SQL input:
<programlisting>
@@ -66,6 +60,12 @@ INSERT INTO MY_TABLE VALUES (3, 'hi there');
</para>
<para>
+ Additionally, <firstterm>comments</firstterm> can occur in SQL
+ input. They are not tokens, they are effectively equivalent to
+ whitespace.
+ </para>
+
+ <para>
The SQL syntax is not very consistent regarding what tokens
identify commands and which are operands or parameters. The first
few tokens are generally the command name, so in the above example
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
