> On 7 Feb 2019, at 18:20, David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 10:10:32AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 03:41:20PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >>> Correct. One could argue that the regex is still suboptimal since “COMMENT >>> ON >>> DATABASE postgres IS ;” will be matched as well, but there I think the >>> tradeoff >>> for readability wins. >> >> Okay, that looks like an improvement anyway, so committed after going >> over the tests for similar problems, and there was one for CREATE >> DATABASE and DROP ROLE. It is possible to have a regex which tells as >> at least one non-whitespace character, but from what I can see these >> don't really improve the readability. > > Are you talking about \w+, or [^[:space:]]+, [^[:blank:]]+, or…?
Personally I feel that expanding these test regexes to catch more low-risk bugs, at the cost of readability, is a slippery slope towards implementing a SQL parser in regexes. That was my $0.02 for not attempting to make these bulletproof. cheers ./daniel
