Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> Ian Lance Taylor writes:
>
> > I've been experimenting with using a different parser (one which is
> > more Oracle compatible).
>
> Why aren't you trying to add the missing pieces to the existing parser?
Because my goal is a parser which can accept Oracle code directly, and
Oracle does not use the same SQL syntax as Postgres. They are, of
course, very similar, but it is not the case that all the differences
are items missing from the Postgres parser. Some of them are items
which Postgres does in a different, typically more standards-
conforming, way.
For example: the datatypes have different names; the set of reserved
words is different; Oracle uses a weird syntax for outer joins.
Ian