Prevent the ORDER BY clause from being dropped in visitor transforms #420
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Fixes #417 Dropping the ORDER BY clause prevents the EvaluationException from being thrown by EvaluatingCompiler due to not having evaluation support for ORDER BY, effectively ignoring the ORDER BY clause.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #420 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 82.24% 82.29% +0.04%
+ Complexity 1400 1394 -6
============================================
Files 171 171
Lines 10724 10725 +1
Branches 1776 1769 -7
============================================
+ Hits 8820 8826 +6
+ Misses 1362 1358 -4
+ Partials 542 541 -1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
dlurton
commented
Jun 15, 2021
|
|
||
| val having = node.having?.let { currentAndUnshadowedTransformer.transformExprSelect_having(node) } | ||
|
|
||
| val order = node.having?.let { currentAndUnshadowedTransformer.transformExprSelect_order(node) } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Bug caused by:
`val order = node.having?...`
All the ?.let calls were unnecessary here anyway too...
dlurton
commented
Jun 15, 2021
| @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ class SelectStarVisitorTransform : VisitorTransformBase() { | |||
| where = node.where, | |||
| group = node.group, | |||
| having = node.having, | |||
| order = node.order, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
bug: this was omitted previously
FWIW, this is the one bug that would have been prevented by using the .copy function, since all we really wanted to do was replace the projection node.
dlurton
commented
Jun 15, 2021
| @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ abstract class VisitorTransformBase : PartiqlAst.VisitorTransform() { | |||
| val having = transformExprSelect_having(node) | |||
| val setq = transformExprSelect_setq(node) | |||
| val project = transformExprSelect_project(node) | |||
| val order = node.having?.let { transformExprSelect_order(node) } | |||
| val order = transformExprSelect_order(node) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
similar to above. bug:
val order = node.having?.let ...
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #417
Dropping the
ORDER BYclause prevents theEvaluationExceptionfrom being thrown byEvaluatingCompilerdue to not having evaluation support forORDER BY, effectively ignoring theORDER BYclause.By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.