> I've spent a bunch of time looking at this series and here's my take on > the second one.
Thanks! > I realized that the whole in_expr production in gram.y is pointless, and > the whole private struct that was added was unnecessary. A much simpler > solution is to remove in_expr, expand its use in a_expr to the two > possibilities, and with that we can remove the need for a new struct. Nice simplification. > I also added a recursive call in IsSquashableExpression to itself. The I agree with this. I was thinking about a follow-up patch for this based on the discussion above, but why not just add it now. > Barring objections, I'll push this soon, then look at rebasing 0003 on > top, which I expect to be an easy job. LGTM. -- Sami
