Andreas:
> >> David Gould writes:
> >> > Consider also not updateing the grammar. The strength of PostgreSQL is that
> >> > functions can be added to work inside the server. These functions can often
> >> > do whatever is being proposed as new syntax.
> >>
> >> So you want me to not check the syntax while parsing the embedded SQL code?
> >
> >What I think we was suggesting is that we add non-ANSI functionality as
> >function calls rather than grammer changes with keywords. The only
> >disadvantage is that it is a little more cumbersom, and less intuitive
> >for users.
>
> but it ** is ** ANSI functionality, look under "role" (with an O)
Ok, but are we using the ANSI syntax? If so, then I withdraw my objection.
But, if we are adding ANSI functionality with UNIQUE syntax, then why bother
hacking the parser since the functionality can be added with functions.
-dg
David Gould dg@illustra.com 510.628.3783 or 510.305.9468
Informix Software (No, really) 300 Lakeside Drive Oakland, CA 94612
- Linux. Not because it is free. Because it is better.