Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> No, it won't. The problem is that it should, because the backend will > >> see that as '42' followed by a $foo$ quote start. > > > Ok, I see what you are saying. This mismatch would only happen on > > invalid input, though. I believe that what I did will work on all legal > > input. > > I'm unconvinced. Even if there are not any current syntaxes in which a > numeric literal can be adjacent to a string literal (I'm not totally > sure about that), what of the future? We should solve the problem > rather than assuming it won't bite us. > > > I think that this might be cured by having psql recognise a legal > > identifier or keyword and eating it as a word, rather than treating it > > as just another set of bytes in the stream. > > Hm, might work ... will think about it ...
I am a little concerned about adding the overhead of lex to psql. Right now, some folks have reported that lex/yacc take a considerable amount of processing time in the backend as part of a query, and adding that to psql just to do $$ seems questionable. Of course, we can alway test and see what the overhead shows. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
