"Florian G. Pflug" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
>>> Are there any ongoing efforts to rewrite the parser (i.e. using
>>> another algorithm, like a recursive descent parser)?
>> Why would you want to do that?
> Last, but not least, the C and C++ syntax is basically set in stone - At
> least now the g++ supports nearly all (or all? don't know) of the C++
> standard. So it doesn't really matter if changes to the parse are a bit
> more work, because the rarely happen. Postgres seems to add new features
> that change the grammar with every release (with is a good thing!).
Yeah. I think it would be a pretty bad idea for us to go over to a
handwritten parser: not only greater implementation effort for grammar
changes, but greater risk of introducing bugs. Bison tells you about it
when you've written something ambiguous ...
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
