Kinda like the blind leading the blind, but:
I'm assuming you will need to do something similar to what you did in
the previous version in gram.y. That is, create an expression node with
the appropriate equations and pass that through ExecEvalExpr().
You can probably return the true or false fr
Hi,
Based on recent discussion, I went thru and got together the work I'd done
on the BETWEEN node. It's not as far along as I thought. I ran into a few
hurdles:
* ExecEvalBetweenExpr is probably beyond my powers - I've done my best and
marked my hopelessness with '@@' symbols. I don't know h
> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > So should I go ahead and submit a patch for BETWEEN that adds SYMMETRY
> > support in the old-style code, and then at a later stage submit
> a patch that
> > makes BETWEEN a proper node?
>
> I'd prefer to do it in one step. I have not
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So should I go ahead and submit a patch for BETWEEN that adds SYMMETRY
> support in the old-style code, and then at a later stage submit a patch that
> makes BETWEEN a proper node?
I'd prefer to do it in one step. I have not noticed any lar
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > > So should I go ahead and submit a patch for BETWEEN that adds SYMMETRY
> > > support in the old-style code, and then at a later stage submit
> > a patch that
> > > makes BETWEEN a proper node?
> >
> > Sure, I think that makes sense. The larger BETWEEN node cod
> > So should I go ahead and submit a patch for BETWEEN that adds SYMMETRY
> > support in the old-style code, and then at a later stage submit
> a patch that
> > makes BETWEEN a proper node?
>
> Sure, I think that makes sense. The larger BETWEEN node code will be
> tricky.
Question: Why have you
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > TODO updated:
> >
> > > * Add BETWEEN ASYMMETRIC/SYMMETRIC (Christopher)
> > > * Christopher is Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> So should I go ahead and submit a patch for BETWEEN that adds SYMMETRY
> support in the old-style code, and then at a
> TODO updated:
>
> > * Add BETWEEN ASYMMETRIC/SYMMETRIC (Christopher)
> > * Christopher is Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So should I go ahead and submit a patch for BETWEEN that adds SYMMETRY
support in the old-style code, and then at a later stage submit a patch that
makes BETWEEN
TODO updated:
> * Add BETWEEN ASYMMETRIC/SYMMETRIC (Christopher)
> * Christopher is Christopher Kings-Lynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since it's really just two ways of writing the same thing, wouldn't bison
> just produce the exact same C code? I'll rewrite it anyway for elegance,
> but just wondering...
The emitted code might or might not be the same --- but duplicate o
> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Also, Tom (or anyone): in regards to your previous email,
> should I just go
> > back to using opt_symmetry to shorten the number of productions, since I
> > have to make them reserved words anyway?
>
> Might as well. No point in writing
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Also, Tom (or anyone): in regards to your previous email, should I just go
> back to using opt_symmetry to shorten the number of productions, since I
> have to make them reserved words anyway?
Might as well. No point in writing more product
> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Can someone comment on my use of %prec BETWEEN? Is that still
> correct now
> > that we have the extra BETWEEN forms?
>
> Looks fine. AFAICS we want all these forms to have the binding
> precedence assigned to BETWEEN. If you don't do
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can someone comment on my use of %prec BETWEEN? Is that still correct now
> that we have the extra BETWEEN forms?
Looks fine. AFAICS we want all these forms to have the binding
precedence assigned to BETWEEN. If you don't do the %prec thi
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > Chris,
> >
> > You seem to have forgotten to update keywords.c.
>
> OK - works perfectly now :)
>
> Now I'm going to play with making the SYMMERIC and ASYMMETRIC keywords less
> reserved...
>
> Can someone comment on my use of %prec BETWE
> Chris,
>
> You seem to have forgotten to update keywords.c.
OK - works perfectly now :)
Now I'm going to play with making the SYMMERIC and ASYMMETRIC keywords less
reserved...
Can someone comment on my use of %prec BETWEEN? Is that still correct now
that we have the extra BETWEEN forms?
Chr
On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've attached a patch for doing BETWEEN SYM/ASYM, however it just doesn't
> work!!!
>
> test=# select 2 between 1 and 3;
> ?column?
> --
> t
> (1 row)
>
> test=# select 2 between 3 and 1;
> ?column?
> --
> f
Hi all,
I've attached a patch for doing BETWEEN SYM/ASYM, however it just doesn't
work!!!
test=# select 2 between 1 and 3;
?column?
--
t
(1 row)
test=# select 2 between 3 and 1;
?column?
--
f
(1 row)
test=# select 2 between symmetric 3 and 1;
ERROR: parser: parse error at
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I was forced to put SYMMETRIC and ASYMMETRIC as reserved words - anything
> else seemed to give shift/reduce errors. Is there anything I can do about
> that?
First thought is "don't try to be cute": forget the opt_asymmetry
clause, and inst
*sigh*
I actually attached the diff this time...
Chris
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Christopher
> Kings-Lynne
> Sent: Wednesday, 3 April 2002 12:26 PM
> To: Hackers
> Subject: [HACKERS] BETWEEN SYMMETRIC/AS
Hi All,
As part of my ongoing quest to understand grammar files, I've been trying to
implement BETWEEN SYMMETRIC/ASYMMETRIC.
I've attached my current work. Can someone please look and tell me if I'm
on the right track? With this patch, I get parse errors after BETWEEN if I
go:
SELECT 2 BETWEE
"Robert B. Easter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This quote from the SQL standard (1999) has it:
Oh, I didn't realize SQL99 had added it. Creeping featurism strikes
again ;-). Well, I suppose it'll get added to PG whenever someone
feels like implementing it, then ...
re
>
> I don't really see this as important enough to justify introducing a
> nonstandard syntax for it...
>
> regards, tom lane
Sorry to quote like this, it makes me feel like a real nerd. :)
This quote from the SQL standard (1999) has it:
8.3
Function
"Robert B. Easter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> subselects=# SELECT 2 BETWEEN 3 AND 1;
> ?column?
> --
> f
> (1 row)
SQL92 quoth:
6) "X BETWEEN Y AND Z" is equivalent to "X>=Y AND X<=Z".
so this is correct behavior, even if it might seem surprising.
> Any chance of BETWEEN
Here is current cvs:
SELECT 2 BETWEEN 1 AND 3;
?column?
--
t
(1 row)
subselects=# SELECT 2 BETWEEN 3 AND 1;
?column?
--
f
(1 row)
Any chance of BETWEEN [SYMMETRIC | ASYMMETRIC] being implemented?
SELECT 2 BETWEEN SYMMETRIC 3 AND 1;
?column?
--
t
(1 row)
ASYMM
25 matches
Mail list logo
