Re: Re: UNION JOIN vs UNION SELECT

Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Chris <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au> writes:
> >> the grammar is just plain not LR(1) unless you
> >> count UNION JOIN as a single token.
> 
> > Would it be bad to make UNION JOIN as a single token?
> 
> That's exactly the solution I'm proposing.  However, it's pretty painful
> to make the lexer do it directly (consider intervening comments, for
> example)

Comments are a pain in the parser. What if something prior to the lexer
filtered out comments before either the lexer or parser could see them?
Would it be as easy as s/--.*// before the lexer?