Re: [HACKERS] CURRENT/OLD keywords still broken

2000-12-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
OK, compatibility mapping removed. > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > That was me. The old code did old -> current, so I changed it to do > > current -> old. How else can I fix this? Attached is the old patch. > > But CURRENT was strictly an internal token name, not a string the

Re: [HACKERS] CURRENT/OLD keywords still broken

2000-12-15 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian writes: > > peter=# select 1 as current; > > old > > - > >1 > > > > This is now the inverse of what it used to do, but it's still not what it > > *should* do. I see someone already tried to fix that (keywords.c 1.76 -> > > 1.77, TODO list), but he should try again. > > Tha

Re: [HACKERS] CURRENT/OLD keywords still broken

2000-12-15 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > That was me. The old code did old -> current, so I changed it to do > current -> old. How else can I fix this? Attached is the old patch. But CURRENT was strictly an internal token name, not a string the user could actually see. So there's no need t

Re: [HACKERS] CURRENT/OLD keywords still broken

2000-12-15 Thread Tom Lane
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > peter=# select 1 as current; > old > - >1 > This is now the inverse of what it used to do, but it's still not what it > *should* do. I see someone already tried to fix that (keywords.c 1.76 -> > 1.77, TODO list), but he should try again. W

Re: [HACKERS] CURRENT/OLD keywords still broken

2000-12-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
> peter=# select 1 as current; > old > - >1 > > This is now the inverse of what it used to do, but it's still not what it > *should* do. I see someone already tried to fix that (keywords.c 1.76 -> > 1.77, TODO list), but he should try again. That was me. The old code did old -> curren