Makes sense. Yes, it would be great if psql offered a flag for validating syntax. Other programming languages do this, for example, bash -n, ruby -c, and php -l.
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Andrew Pennebaker <andrew.penneba...@gmail.com> writes: > > I can't find a relevant section to address my specific problem: ecpg > > complaining when I try to check the syntax of my .sql files that use > input > > parameters. > > I'm not sure why you think that should work. psql and ecpg have quite > distinct input languages. Both are extensions of SQL, but the key word > there is "extension". ecpg certainly isn't going to accept psql's > backslash commands for instance, any more than psql would accept ecpg's > C code portions. And I doubt it would be useful for ecpg to simply ignore > the variable-interpolation symbols; but it has no way to know what's going > to be substituted for those symbols. > > It would be more interesting to consider giving psql a syntax-check-only > mode; though I'm afraid use of variable interpolation would still be pretty > problematic, since the variables are commonly filled from execution of > previous commands. > > regards, tom lane > -- Cheers, Andrew Pennebaker www.yellosoft.us
