Hi.
From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
A possibly bigger problem is that the solution for postfix ops doesn't
scale nicely: we'd have to list not only IDENT, but *every* can-be-ColId
keyword, in the %precedence list, which (a) is a maintenance headache,
(b) causes a conflict because some are already listed there with the
wrong precedence for this purpose, and (c) is very scary from the
viewpoint of possibly silently suppressing warnings of future grammar
ambiguities. I'm not even that happy with giving IDENT a precedence;
giving precedences to 270 or so currently precedence-less tokens
just doesn't sound safe.
Yeah, when I began, I tried the method same as a_expr IDENT as you.
That is because I thought that it was effective in order to avoid a conflict
simply. It is worried that it may cause the problem of next operation by the
reason IDENT is not the simple token. Therefore, c_expr IDENT of the
method of doing with a basic rule was proposed. However, If it is allowed
in the place which you consider, I don't have an objection.
Regards,
Hiroshi Saito
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
