Add to syntax error reporting.

diff --git a/doc/TODO.detail/yacc b/doc/TODO.detail/yacc
index 9aba8cae968cb1645cab0a018805b14c3ad8bb38..8e7fa8986c13889e60193916d9c63724e3954c8c 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/TODO.detail/yacc
+++ b/doc/TODO.detail/yacc
@@ -330,3 +330,73 @@ error reporting.
 
 --Gene
 
+From [email protected] Sat Aug  4 13:11:53 2001
+Return-path: 
+Received: from postgresql.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
+   by candle.pha.pa.us (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f74HBrh11339
+   for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 13:11:53 -0400 (EDT)
+Received: from postgresql.org.org (webmail.postgresql.org [216.126.85.28])
+   by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.4) with SMTP id f74H89655183;
+   Sat, 4 Aug 2001 13:08:09 -0400 (EDT)
+   (envelope-from [email protected])
+Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([192.204.191.242])
+   by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f74Gxb653074
+   for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:59:37 -0400 (EDT)
+   (envelope-from [email protected])
+Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
+   by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id f74GtPC29183;
+   Sat, 4 Aug 2001 12:55:25 -0400 (EDT)
+To: Dave Page 
+cc: "'Fernando Nasser'" ,
+   Bruce Momjian , Neil Padgett ,
+   [email protected]
+Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Patch for Improved Syntax Error Reporting 
+In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> 
+References: <[email protected]>
+Comments: In-reply-to Dave Page 
+   message dated "Sat, 04 Aug 2001 12:37:23 +0100"
+Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2001 12:55:24 -0400
+Message-ID: <[email protected]>
+From: Tom Lane 
+Precedence: bulk
+Sender: [email protected]
+Status: OR
+
+Dave Page  writes:
+> Oh, I quite agree. I'm not adverse to updating my code, I just want to avoid
+> users getting misleading messages until I come up with those updates.
+
+Hmm ... if they were actively misleading then I'd share your concern.
+
+I guess what you're thinking is that the error offset reported by the
+backend won't correspond directly to what the user typed, and if the
+user tries to use the offset to manually count off characters, he may
+arrive at the wrong place?  Good point.  I'm not sure whether a message
+like
+
+   ERROR:  parser: parse error at or near 'frum';
+   POSITION: 42
+
+would be likely to encourage people to try that.  Thoughts?  (I do think
+this is a good argument for not embedding the position straight into the
+main error message though...)
+
+One possible compromise is to combine the straight character-offset
+approach with a simplistic context display:
+
+   ERROR:  parser: parse error at or near 'frum';
+   POSITION: 42  ... oid,relname FRUM ...
+
+The idea is to define the "POSITION" field as an integer offset possibly
+followed by whitespace and noise words.  An updated client would grab
+the offset, ignore the rest of the field, and do the right thing.  A
+not-updated client would display the entire message, and with any luck
+the user would read it correctly.
+
+           regards, tom lane
+
+---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
+TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
+
+http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
+