Re: [HACKERS] ECPG parse.pl and parse2.pl

2011-06-14 Thread Michael Meskes
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:59:38PM +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > I propose that we move parse2.pl to parse.pl and only keep the one. I agree, thanks for taking care. Originally I wanted to keep parse.pl around for a bit, so I could run both and compare the output over the development cycle. Bu

Re: [HACKERS] ECPG parse.pl and parse2.pl

2011-06-13 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut writes: > Surely we don't need parse.pl and parse2.pl? parse.pl, the one that's > not used, it already showing signs of semi-bit-rot: > Use of assignment to $[ is deprecated at ./parse.pl line 21. > I propose that we move parse2.pl to parse.pl and only keep the one. Yes. This

[HACKERS] ECPG parse.pl and parse2.pl

2011-06-13 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Surely we don't need parse.pl and parse2.pl? parse.pl, the one that's not used, it already showing signs of semi-bit-rot: Use of assignment to $[ is deprecated at ./parse.pl line 21. I propose that we move parse2.pl to parse.pl and only keep the one. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (p