Michael Meskes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 10:41:17AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Perhaps there's some discrepancy between the ecpg and backend lexers
>> as to where these are called?
> You're right. There is no way to (un)select standard conforming strings
> which makes up
On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 10:41:17AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Perhaps there's some discrepancy between the ecpg and backend lexers
> as to where these are called?
You're right. There is no way to (un)select standard conforming strings
which makes up for the difference. Thanks for pointing me into th
Michael Meskes wrote:
Hi,
could anyone please enlighten me whether this function is still needed?
AFAICT check_escape_warning() only has significant action if
warn_on_first_escape is true. This variable is set to true only on label
xqstart, but to false on xestart. However, check_escape_warni
Michael Meskes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> could anyone please enlighten me whether this function is still needed?
> AFAICT check_escape_warning() only has significant action if
> warn_on_first_escape is true. This variable is set to true only on label
> xqstart, but to false on xestart. However,
Hi,
could anyone please enlighten me whether this function is still needed?
AFAICT check_escape_warning() only has significant action if
warn_on_first_escape is true. This variable is set to true only on label
xqstart, but to false on xestart. However, check_escape_warning() and
check_string_esca
