Matt S Trout wrote:
> { -or => [ { 'chunks.id => undef' }, { 'chunks_2.id' => undef }, {
> 'chunks.id' => \'!= chunks2.id' } ] }
>
> i.e.
>
> WHERE (chunks.id IS NULL OR chunks_2.id IS NULL OR chunks.id !=
> chunks2.id)
>
> It's not amazingly elegant, which is why the JOIN ON syntax is
No. Does not work.
> generally preferred, but by and large you can move stuff in and ON
> clause into the WHERE clause or vice versa just fine - a LEFT JOIN is
> pretty much just a JOIN against all values of that table *plus* a row
> consisting entirely of NULLs.
Yeah. And I need the NULLs:
Your query only finds multi-part emails, because only for those
"chunks.id!=chunks_2.id" is true if this is in the WHERE part.
"chunks.id IS NULL OR chunks_2.id IS NULL" in the WHERE part is useless,
because they will never be NULL without "chunks.id!=chunks_2.id" in the
LEFT JOIN.
> This is why I hate it when people tell me something "must be"
> different to my suggestions without justification - if you don't
> explain *why* you think that, I can't tell you the bit you're missing
> :)
I'm still not convinced. ;-P
Anyway - is the patch I sent yesterday acceptable now?
--
Bernhard Graf
_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.rawmode.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
Wiki: http://dbix-class.shadowcatsystems.co.uk/
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/trunk/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dbix-class@lists.rawmode.org/
