> Sean Chittenden <sean@chittenden.org> writes:
> >>::sigh:: Is it me or does it look like all >>of pl/pgsql is schema un-aware (ie, all of the declarations). -sc > > > Yeah. The group of routines parse_word, parse_dblword, etc that are > called by the lexer certainly all need work. There are some > definitional issues to think about, too --- plpgsql presently relies on > the number of names to give it some idea of what to look for, and those > rules are probably all toast now. Please come up with a sketch of what > you think the behavior should be before you start hacking code. Attached is a diff -c format proposal to fix this. I've also attached a short test script. Seems to work OK and passes all regression tests. Here's a breakdown of how I understand plpgsql's "Special word rules" -- I think it illustrates the behavior reasonably well. New functions added by this patch are plpgsql_parse_tripwordtype and plpgsql_parse_dblwordrowtype: Joe Conway
Showing
- src/pl/plpgsql/src/pl_comp.c 161 additions, 1 deletionsrc/pl/plpgsql/src/pl_comp.c
- src/pl/plpgsql/src/plpgsql.h 3 additions, 1 deletionsrc/pl/plpgsql/src/plpgsql.h
- src/pl/plpgsql/src/scan.l 5 additions, 1 deletionsrc/pl/plpgsql/src/scan.l
- src/test/regress/sql/plpgsql-nsp-testing.sql 47 additions, 0 deletionssrc/test/regress/sql/plpgsql-nsp-testing.sql
src/test/regress/sql/plpgsql-nsp-testing.sql
0 → 100644
Please register or sign in to comment