On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 11:28 +1000, Neil Conway wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Dunno. Depending on such a thing would require depending on a new flex
version, and seeing that the flex guys haven't put out a new release
since the badly broken 2.5.31 more than 2 years ago, I wouldn't hold
my breath
On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 22:43 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Based on the comments so far in this thread, I'll go ahead and commit
the patch, with some comments attached of course --- in particular a big
head comment to run flex with -b and see that lex.backup says something
to this effect.
flex counts
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Would we use the -x switch if we had it?
Dunno. Depending on such a thing would require depending on a new flex
version, and seeing that the flex guys haven't put out a new release
since the badly broken 2.5.31 more than 2 years ago, I wouldn't hold
my
Tom Lane wrote:
Dunno. Depending on such a thing would require depending on a new flex
version, and seeing that the flex guys haven't put out a new release
since the badly broken 2.5.31 more than 2 years ago, I wouldn't hold
my breath waiting for one we can use.
It should be easy enough to
This seems fine. I don't think the lexer changes enough for us to have
issues with new cases. I think adding some comments to explain why we
are doing it is enough, and perhaps a test case that can be reproduced
later for testing.
On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 12:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
doesn't seem to be any way to get flex to complain if someone later
makes a change that breaks the no-backup-cases property again.
After some digging, there is a -b option will generate a file called
lex.backup if any backup-states exist. The
Tom Lane wrote:
[snip - flex is slowed down by backtracking - how to fix ]
What I'm wondering is whether this is really worth doing or not.
There are currently just two parts of the lexer rules that are affected
--- the {real} rule illustrated above, and the rules that allow quoted
strings
What I'm wondering is whether this is really worth doing or not.
There are currently just two parts of the lexer rules that are affected
--- the {real} rule illustrated above, and the rules that allow quoted
strings to be split across lines as the SQL spec requires. But the
patches are still
But I do think it's worth it, even so ... not all client interfaces
support prepared statements (notoriously PHP, although I understand KL
has sent patches to fix that) and not all inserts are suitable for COPY.
There is now pg_prepare/pg_execute/pg_query_params in PHP, however you
could
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, 2005-05-23 at 12:31 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
doesn't seem to be any way to get flex to complain if someone later
makes a change that breaks the no-backup-cases property again.
After some digging, there is a -b option will generate a file called
Based on the comments so far in this thread, I'll go ahead and commit
the patch, with some comments attached of course --- in particular a big
head comment to run flex with -b and see that lex.backup says something
to this effect.
Add it to the release check-list.
Chris
Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, the lexer isn't touched anywhere near as much as the grammar is
right?
Yeah --- if you look at the CVS history, changes that affect the flex
rules (and not just the text of the C-code actions) are really rare
these days. If there
12 matches
Mail list logo
