ne 13. 1. 2019 v 0:39 odesÃlatel Chapman Flack <c...@anastigmatix.net> napsal:
> On 12/30/18 03:23, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > Unfortunately, there is a different releases of libxml2 with different > > error reporting and it is hard (impossible) to prepare for all variants. > :-/ > > > > I prepare xml.out for my FC29 (fresh libxml2) and for no support xml. > > Other I prepare by patching - and this error (in context) is expected. > > It turns out that the variant was already accounted for in the xml_2.out > variant result file, it just needed to have the new results added. > > Done in xmltable-xpath-result-processing-bugfix-4.patch attached. > > > On 12/31/18 01:03, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > po 31. 12. 2018 v 3:15 odesÃlatel Chapman Flack <c...@anastigmatix.net> > > napsal: > >> But the PostgreSQL situation is a little more strange. PG uses BY VALUE > >> semantics as the default when no passing method is specified. PG also > uses > >> BY VALUE semantics when BY REF is explicitly requested, which is rude, > >> just like Oracle. But why should an explicit specification of BY VALUE > >> (which is, after all, the semantics we're going to use anyway!) produce > >> this? > >> > >> ERROR: syntax error at or near "value" > >> > >> To me, that doesn't seem like least astonishment. > >> > >> I am not seeing what would be complicated about removing that > astonishment > >> by simply allowing the grammar productions to also consume BY VALUE and > >> ignore it. > > > > ok - I am not against implementation of ignored BY VALUE. But I don't > like > > a idea to disable BY REF. > > Done in attached xmltable-xmlexists-passing-mechanisms-1.patch along with > some corresponding documentation adjustments. > > I am still working on more extensive documentation, but it seemed best > to include the changes related to BY REF / BY VALUE in the same patch > with the grammar change. > looks well, thank you for patch Pavel > -Chap >
