"Daniel Verite" <dan...@manitou-mail.org> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Returning to my upthread thought that >>> I think we should fix it so that \. that's not alone on a line >>> throws an error, but I wouldn't go further than that. >> here's a quick follow-on patch to make that happen. It could >> probably do with a test case to demonstrate the error, but >> I didn't bother yet pending approval that we want to do this.
> +1 for fixing. It's been on the thread for awhile now without objections, so I'll go ahead and make that happen. regards, tom lane