On Tuesday 25 November 2008 15:09:37 Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > While hacking on parser/gram.y just now I noticed in passing that the > > automatically generated ecpg parser had 402 shift/reduce conflicts. > > (Don't panic, the parser in CVS is fine.) If you don't pay very close > > attention, it is easy to miss this. Considering also that we frequently > > have to educate contributors that parser conflicts are not acceptable, > > should we try to error out if we see conflicts? > > Would "%expect 0" produce the same result in a less klugy way?
Great, that works. I'll see about adding this to our parser files. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
