Reserved vs supported words in SQL

[mmnosek]

Type of issue:

We present the list of the reserved words but not all of them are supported. Example: Distinct. The list suggests that all of those words are available in Starcounter. I was asked about it by one of our customers and completely agree.

Link to relevant page:

https://docs.starcounter.io/guides/SQL/reserved-words/

@k-rus - could you please confirm that the list of the reserved words != list of supported words? If so, why some of them are reserved while not supported? To avoid problems in the future when new features added?

@Mackiovello we need to distinguish somehow those two lists: reserved and supported words. WDYT?

[ErlendLandro]

This is a good point. What I would suggest is to sometime early in the section write what's supported in Starcounter SQL. This page would then only be for reserved words. My understanding is that we reserve these words to avoid breaking changes with new keyword support.

[k-rus]

I guess that the list of reserved words was hardcoded in OldSQL based on SQL standard and not the implementation. I think it is safe to remove the reserved keywords, which are not implemented in OldSQL, so the documentation doesn't confuse users.

[mmnosek]

@k-rus If we assume that those words won't be implemented in OldSQL (because we invest our time in NewSQL only), could we make them not reserved first and then remove from documentation to make it perfectly clear? It should not be a big change I guess. Then everything will be crystal clear.

[k-rus]

@k-rus If we assume that those words won't be implemented in OldSQL (because we invest our time in NewSQL only), could we make them not reserved first and then remove from documentation to make it perfectly clear? It should not be a big change I guess. Then everything will be crystal clear.

I am not eager to remove them from being keywords as it is not a small job. The parser is written in Prolog, which requires to learn every rare occasion how to do it right.