Tom Lane wrote:
I'm not sure I believe the new coding for %-matching at all, and I
certainly don't like the 100% lack of comments explaining why the
different cases are necessary and just how they differ.  In particular,
once we've advanced more than one character, why does it still matter
what was immediately after the %?

I don't understand the question. The % processing looks for a place that matches what is immediately after the % and then tries to match the remainder using a recursive call - so it never actually does matter. I haven't actually changed the fundamental logic AFAIK, I have just rearranged and optimised it some.

I admit that it takes some pondering to understand - I certainly intend to adjust the comments once we are satisfied the code is right. It's going to be next week now before I finish this up :-(



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at


Reply via email to