Re: Re: FILTER for aggregates [was Re: Department of Redundancy Department: makeNode(FuncCall) division]

Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu> writes:
> I think their model is that applications work with a certain version
> of SQL and they're not expected to work with a new version without
> extensive updating.

Hm.  We could invent a "sql_version" parameter and tweak the lexer to
return keywords added in spec versions later than that as IDENT.
However, I fear such a parameter would be a major PITA from the user's
standpoint, just like most of our backwards-compatibility GUCs have
proven to be.
        regards, tom lane