Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@bec.de> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 03:31:11PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The sample hash function certainly looks great. I'm not terribly on board
>> with using |0x20 as a substitute for lower-casing, but that's a minor
>> detail.
> Yeah, I've included that part more because I don't know the current use
> cases enough. If all instances are already doing lower-casing in
> advance, it is trivial to drop.
I think we probably don't need that, because we'd always need to generate
a lower-cased version of the input anyway: either to compare to the
potential keyword match, or to use as the normalized identifier if it
turns out not to be a keyword. I don't think there are any cases where
it's useful to delay downcasing till after the keyword lookup.
>> * What's the generator written in? (if the answer's not "Perl", wedging
>> it into our build processes might be painful)
> Plain C, nothing really fancy in it.
That's actually a bigger problem than you might think, because it
doesn't fit in very nicely in a cross-compiling build: we might not
have any C compiler at hand that generates programs that can execute
on the build machine. That's why we prefer Perl for tools that need
to execute during the build. However, if the code is pretty small
and fast, maybe translating it to Perl is feasible. Or perhaps
we could add sufficient autoconfiscation infrastructure to identify
a native C compiler. It's not very likely that there isn't one,
but it is possible that nothing we learned about the configured
target compiler would apply to it :-(
>> * What license is it under?
> Two clause BSD license.
OK, that works, at least.
regards, tom lane