Re: SQL compliance - why -- comments only at psql level ?
| От | Hannu Krosing |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: SQL compliance - why -- comments only at psql level ? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 38ADD786.97A98EF4@tm.ee обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: SQL compliance, was Re: [HACKERS] follow-up on PC Week Labsbenchmark results (Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Re: SQL compliance - why -- comments only at psql level ?
Re: [HACKERS] Re: SQL compliance - why -- comments only at psql level ? |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Lockhart wrote:
>
> I've since seen the article in the latest issue of PCWeek. The article
> was not at all clear on the *specific* features which would disqualify
> Postgres from having SQL92 entry level compliance (for most commercial
> RDBMSes this is the only level they attain), and I was amused to note
> that although InterBase was lauded for SQL92 compliance, the author
> did encourage them to consider supporting the SQL92 comment delimiter
> ("--") in their next release :))
Why does PostgreSQL _not_ support the -- comment delimiter ?
Is there something complicated to supporting it in parser ?
IMNSHO it would require only a few lines in gram.y
Does supporting user-defined operators interfere ?
I assume we could comfortably disallow -- as a possible operator (one
can't input it from interactive psql anyway)
--------------
Hannu
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: