Re: The "GROUPS" began reserved word since 6.0.0.1986 (rather than just keyword). Why ?

[Adriano dos Santos Fernandes]

It's reserved in the standard and making it non-reserved introduces 2 shift/reduce conflicts.

So more opinions are welcome.

Adriano

Em qui., 4 de jun. de 2026, 03:50, Pavel Zotov <p51...@yandex.com> escreveu:

hi Adriano!

 

Now we can not create any object (e.g. a table or its column) with name "GROUPS".

As i can see after scanning several metadata scripts of our customers, this word may occur many times as table COLUMN (with appropriate FK to some parent reference).

Is it possible to change this word category to the 'key word' ?

 

[Alex Peshkoff]

On 6/4/26 19:26, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> It's reserved in the standard and making it non-reserved introduces 2
> shift/reduce conflicts.
>
> So more opinions are welcome.
>

Even not taking conflicts into an account - why should we violate STD
requirements? Keep it as is.

[Vlad Khorsun]

04.06.2026 19:37, 'Alex Peshkoff' via firebird-devel:

I think we should take into account user's opinions.

IIRC, shift/reduce conflicts is not too scary and two more could be accepted.
Note, we already have 140 in master :)

Regards,
Vlad