2009/7/12 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: >> 2009/7/12 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: >>> If we're going to go for reentrancy >>> I think we should fix both components. > >> when we don't use reentrant grammar, then we cannot use main sql parser in >> SQL? > > It wouldn't be a problem for the immediate application I have in mind, > which is to re-use the core lexer in plpgsql. But it does seem like > it might be a problem down the road as plpgsql gets smarter. >
it's bad. I thing so integration main parser into plpgsql should be the most important feature of plpgsql from trapping exception time. I have to ask - we need it necessary reetrant grammer? We need integration only in complilation time - for CREATE FUNCTION statement. Can be nonreetrant grammer problem (but we have to store some info from validation time somewhere - maybe in probin column) ? > regards, tom lane > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
