On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Also, it strikes me that we could significantly reduce, maybe even fully > eliminate, the funny behaviors around the existing base_yylex() > substitutions if we made them use the same idea, ie replace the leading > token with something special but keep the second token's separate > identity. Unless somebody sees a hole in this idea, I'll probably go > do that and then come back to the precedence issues.
IIRC that's exactly what the earlier patch for this did. -- greg -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
