On 10/30/2011 04:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but if we choose the word carefully
>> (which is why I chose EXCLUDING), I think we're okay? EXCLUDING is
>> already defined as an "ordinary key word".
> Yeah, it's unreserved so it doesn't break use of the same name for
> columns or functions. I'm not sure that you can make the syntax work
> the way you suggest without bumping up its reserved-ness level.
> That's just a gut feeling, I've not tried it ... but the proposed
> syntax sure looks a lot like a call to a function named EXCLUDING.
Adding this rule doesn't appear to cause any complications:
target_el: '*' EXCLUDING '(' ')'
I'm not saying we need to do this, although there have been times when I
might have liked it, but I suspect it would not cause us any grammar
problems at least.
cheers
andrew