Skip to content

Conversation

@soulstompp
Copy link

This change addresses #71 by ensuring that an independent HAVING clause parses correctly. In general I will try to avoid any changes change the AST, but I felt in this case the changes made it more accurate.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant