Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dave Page wrote:
>>> Perhaps use a separate string for machine parse (say R, T, C, U), and
>>> let the string be translatable.
>>
>> I considered that, but wasn't sure if folks would like the redundancy.
>> It's trivial to do of course - any objections?
> Is there anything useful you would do with this information? Or would you
> just quote all listed words anyway?
I think the practical application would be to avoid quoting unreserved
keywords, as pg_dump for instance already does. I doubt anyone would
bother distinguishing the different types of partially/wholly reserved
words. So maybe a boolean would be sufficient --- but I have nothing
against the R/T/C/U suggestion.
A more radical alternative is just to omit unreserved words from the
view altogether.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches
