Map access supports constant-resolvable expressions#14712
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
sqllogictest
alamb
left a comment
alamb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you @Lordworms -- this looks great and very close
I think it just needs a few more negative tests
cc @goldmedal
| [NULL] [NULL] [[1, NULL, 3]] | ||
| [NULL] [NULL] [NULL] | ||
|
|
||
| query ? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you also please add some error tests for out of bounds access. For example, column[0], column[-1] and column[1000] to test the boundary condidtions?
Also, it seems like the code in this PR supports queries like
select column1[column2]where column2 is an array of integer as well
Can you also add a test for that syntax as well?
| .slice(start, end - start) | ||
| .iter() | ||
| .enumerate() | ||
| .find(|(_, t)| t.unwrap()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't understand why this panic is never called, but then I see you just moved the code
|
Also FYI @findepi |
Lordworms
force-pushed
the
issue_14552
branch
2 times, most recently
from
acd81e7 to
92174c1
Compare
fix clippy fix clippy fix clippy
Lordworms
force-pushed
the
issue_14552
branch
from
92174c1 to
1265bba
Compare
|
thanks for your PR! What are "constant-resolvable expressions"? |
I should change the title, primitive and part of the nested types(array, struct, list) are supported now |
alamb
left a comment
alamb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you @Lordworms and @findepi -- looks good to me
|
For soem reason this PR caused a logical / build conflict |
3 participants
Which issue does this PR close?
Rationale for this change
What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?
Are there any user-facing changes?