Thanks for the effort, Pascal! I'll do my best.
I was curious about the lazy/reference loading since I didn't see it
working. I just assumed I was doing something wrong. It'll be great to
help in any way I can.
On Sep 14, 2008, at 11:30 AM, Pascal Craponne wrote:
> Done.
> Welcome to our new contributor, Matthew Snyder :)
> You can now commit your own changes.
>
>
> Since you join the project now, here's a brief development status:
> - A few core features are missing (outer joins, references loading,
> lazy loading)
> - Most of engine is in the core, the vendors are left as small as
> possible: we want new database support to be easily done.
> - We're on our way to be Mono's Linq-to-SQL engine (and that is a
> pride!)
> - After this, we'll probably add some specific features, but isolate
> them, in order to keep compatility with Mono (we have to build
> modes, strict [==Mono] and extended [DbLinq and specific features])
>
> On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 14:23, Matthew Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> On Sep 14, 2008, at 8:07 AM, Pascal Craponne wrote:
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > Matthew, are you interested in joining the team? You could commit
> > your changes on your own.
>
> I would be delighted to join the team and help out where I can. I've
> attached a diff of my changes regardless in case someone else wants to
> confirm the test passes before that.
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Pablo, Matthew, regarding the 0/1 start index, that's a good point,
> > and we have two options:
> > 1. give to each potentially problematic SQL generation method both
> > values, the one where index starts at 0, the other where index
> > starts at 1.
> > 2. add some characteristics to the ISqlProvider, telling if string
> > indexes start at 0 or 1, for example.
>
> I would definitely say the second choice. An override string,
> something like Option Base in Visual Basic :-)
>
> >
> > What's you favorite flavor?
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 11:56, Pablo Iñigo Blasco
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 6:32 AM, Ardekantur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > wrote:
> >
> > Hello all -
> >
> > Hi Matthew!
> >
> >
> >
> > Puttering through some of the tests for Oracle and caught a fairly
> > simple fix for a couple of tests. Where the default SQL provider
> users
> > `STRPOS` for getting the right behavior from #IndexOf LINQ queries,
> > Oracle has INSTR and SUBSTR.
> >
> > Thus:
> >
> > Index: src/DbLinq.Oracle/OracleSqlProvider.cs
> > ===================================================================
> > --- src/DbLinq.Oracle/OracleSqlProvider.cs (revision 876)
> > +++ src/DbLinq.Oracle/OracleSqlProvider.cs (working copy)
> > @@ -92,5 +92,28 @@
> > @"SELECT * FROM ({3}{0}{3}) WHERE {2} > {1}",
> > GetLiteralLimit(select, offsetAndLimit), offset,
> > LimitedRownum, NewLine);
> > }
> > +
> > + protected override string GetLiteralStringIndexOf(string
> > baseString, string searchString, string startIndex, string count)
> > + {
> > + // SUBSTR(baseString, StartIndex)
> > + string substring = GetLiteralSubString(baseString,
> > startIndex, count);
> > +
> > + // INSTR(SUBSTR(baseString, StartIndex), searchString)
> > ---
> > > range 1:n , 0 => doesn't exist
> > + return string.Format("INSTR({0},{1})", substring,
> > searchString);
> > + }
> > +
> > + protected override string GetLiteralStringIndexOf(string
> > baseString, string searchString, string startIndex)
> > + {
> > + // SUBSTR(baseString,StartIndex)
> > + string substring = GetLiteralSubString(baseString,
> > startIndex);
> > +
> > + // INSTR(SUBSTR(baseString, StartIndex), searchString)
> > ---
> > > range 1:n , 0 => doesn't exist
> > + return string.Format("INSTR({0},{1})", substring,
> > searchString);
> > + }
> > +
> > + protected override string GetLiteralStringIndexOf(string
> > baseString, string searchString)
> > + {
> > + return GetLiteralSubtract(string.Format("INSTR({0},
> {1})",
> > baseString, searchString), "1");
> > + }
> > }
> > }
> >
> > It seems to be fine. The main potential problem you should consider
> > here is the 'indexes start offset' difference between pl-sql and
> > clr. Most of sql-engine has as first array index = 1. In the other
> > hand, clr and most of programming languages has as first array index
> > = 0. If you have considered it, it shoud be ok.
> >
> >
> > This knocks out 5 more tests, I think.
> >
> > Great :-D
> >
> > I may write some more just to
> > make sure we're hitting as many cases as we can.
> >
> > That would be fantastic, they would be reused by others vendors too.
> >
> > I have tried apply the patch over the Oracle folder, but it crashes,
> > wich revision are you using? could you send an attached .patch file?
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Pascal.
> >
> > jabber/gtalk: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > msn: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> > > >
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Pascal.
>
> jabber/gtalk: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> msn: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> This message is part of the topic "Oracle and a batch of fixed
> IndexOf*
> Tests" in the Google Group "DbLinq" for which you requested email
> updates.
> To stop receiving email updates for this topic, please visit the topic
> at http://groups.google.com/group/dblinq/t/b8c211c03d16d2db
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"DbLinq" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/dblinq?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
