Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> It is unlikely that we can transparently parse two-word types in
> gram.y without explicit support for it. Just adding IDENT IDENT to
> simple types leads to a shift/reduce conflict.
Right. I think what Peter is actually suggesting is that BIT VARYING
(which must be special-cased in gram.y) could be equivalent to
"bit varying" (as a quoted identifier, that works already in most
places, and arguably should work everywhere). There's a certain amount
of intellectual cleanliness in that. OTOH, it's not apparent that it's
really any *better* than `varbit' or your choice of other space-free
internal names.
If SQL92 were a moving target then I'd be concerned about having to
track the special cases in a lot of bits of code ... but it's not
a moving target.
regards, tom lane