Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Another look around shows that the CoerceToDomain struct takes its
> location from the new Const location in turn, so my dirty little hack
> will break the location of the CoerceToDomain struct, giving an
> arguably incorrect caret position in some error messages. It would
> suit me if MyCoerceToDomain->arg (or the "arg" of a similar node
> related to coercion, like CoerceViaIO) pointed to a Const node with,
> potentially, and certainly in the case of my original CoerceToDomain
> test case, a distinct location to the coercion node itself.
Sorry, I'm not following. What about that isn't true already?
regards, tom lane
