Tom Lane wrote:
I'm not sure I believe the new coding for %-matching at all, and I
certainly don't like the 100% lack of comments explaining why the
different cases are necessary and just how they differ. In particular,
once we've advanced more than one character, why does it still matter
what was immediately after the %?
I don't understand the question. The % processing looks for a place that
matches what is immediately after the % and then tries to match the
remainder using a recursive call - so it never actually does matter. I
haven't actually changed the fundamental logic AFAIK, I have just
rearranged and optimised it some.
I admit that it takes some pondering to understand - I certainly intend
to adjust the comments once we are satisfied the code is right. It's
going to be next week now before I finish this up :-(
cheers
andrew
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
