RE: [HACKERS] Postgres' lexer
От | Ansley, Michael |
---|---|
Тема | RE: [HACKERS] Postgres' lexer |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1BF7C7482189D211B03F00805F8527F70ED11D@S-NATH-EXCH2 обсуждение исходный текст |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I've just grabbed it now, I'll get back to you Monday. >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Leon [mailto:leon@udmnet.ru] >> Sent: Friday, August 20, 1999 8:28 PM >> To: Ansley, Michael >> Cc: hackers >> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Postgres' lexer >> >> >> Ansley, Michael wrote: >> > >> > Leon, if you manage to find a replacement for this, please >> let me know. >> > I'll probably only pick it up after the weekend. >> > >> > I think that we need to find another way to tokenise the >> minus. First of >> > all, though, how is the parser supposed to tell whether this: >> > a -2 >> > means this: >> > (a - 2) >> > or this: >> > a (-2) >> >> I think that the current behavior is ok - it is what we would expect >> from expressions like 'a -2'. >> >> I have produced a patch to cleanup the code. It works due to the >> fact that unary minus gets processed in doNegate() in parser anyway, >> and it is by no way lexer's job to do grammatical parsing - i.e. >> deciding if operator is to be treated as binary or unary. >> >> I ran regression tests, everything seems to be ok. It is my first >> diff/patch experience in *NIX, so take it with mercy :) But it >> seems to be correct. It is to be applied against 6.5.0 (I have >> not upgraded to 6.5.1 yet, but hope lexer hasn't changed since >> then.) The patch mainly contains nuked code. The only thing added >> is my short comment :) >> >> Have I done some right thing? :) >> >> -- >> Leon. >> --------- >> "This may seem a bit weird, but that's okay, because it is weird." - >> Perl manpage. >>
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: