>go about this. That will risk breaking existing applications that use
>those names as column names.
>
>It should actually almost work to write sq.nextval as things stand,
>because Postgres has for a long time considered table.function and
>function(table) to be interchangeable notations for certain kinds of
>functions. nextval doesn't seem to be one of that kind of function,
>at the moment. I'd suggest leaving the grammar as it was, and taking a
>look at ParseFuncOrColumn in parse_func.c to see if you can't persuade
>it to accept the sequence functions in that style.
OK, good point. I tried to implement it somewhere else and ended up
extending transformAttr. Attached you'll find the patch.
Jeroen van Vianen
cf374febf5