I just got a reply from the original author of the patch I was talking
about:
----- Forwarded message from Rene Hogendoorn <hogend@nlr.nl> -----
From: Rene Hogendoorn <hogend@nlr.nl>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 14:23:08 +0100 (MET)
To: Michael Meskes <michael@fam-meskes.de>
Subject: Re: ECPG patches
TL> Michael Meskes <meskes@postgreSQL.org> writes: >> <fetch statement> ::= FETCH [ [ <fetch orientation> ] FROM ]
>> <cursor name> INTO <fetch target list>
>> To me this seems to say that FROM is just optional. Okay, if I >> make it optional in our parser?
TL> Careful --- notice that FROM is only optional if you *also* TL> omit all the preceding optional clauses.
Otherwisethere will TL> be a reduce conflict that you could only resolve by removing TL> all of FETCH's secondary
keywordsfrom the ColId list. I TL> don't think that would be an acceptable tradeoff.
The reduce conflict is caused by the /* EMPTY */ alternatives of
'opt_direction', 'fetch_how_many' and 'opt_portal_name'. Considering
the sql92 syntax, 'opt_portalname' is wrong; the portalname is not
optional, but required. Requiring a portalname also solves the problem
of 'EXEC SQL FETCH; being a valid statement.
Furthermore, at least INFORMIX supports 'FETCH NEXT t1;'. So, I strongly
suggest to NOT require 'FROM'.
...
Regards
Rene
--
R. A. Hogendoorn E-mail: hogend@nlr.nl
Information and Communication Technology Division Tel. +31-527-24-8367
National Aerospace Laboratory, The Netherlands Fax. +31-527-24-8210
----- End forwarded message -----
Michael
--
Michael Meskes | Go SF 49ers!
Th.-Heuss-Str. 61, D-41812 Erkelenz | Go Rhein Fire!
Tel.: (+49) 2431/72651 | Use Debian GNU/Linux!
Email: Michael@Fam-Meskes.De | Use PostgreSQL!