Yen-Ju Chen wrote: > On 6/9/07, Fred Kiefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> There are plenty of other problems with predicates that your tests >> uncovered. For example we don't support "==", but have "=". Which of >> them should we have? Both?
Fixed >> Also the "IN" operator will only work for strings, not for a set and an >> element. Fixed >> Handling of "BETWEEN" is completely missing and the parsing of all key >> words failed at the end of the string. >> Fixed >> I tried to fix some of this, but it requires a lot more work. > > Thanx again. I intentionally pick less-used cases for testing > because I believe GNUstep can handle the common ones. > One thing I notice is that with '==' (or '=' for GNUstep), > you cannot specify the case-insensitive ([c]). Fixed or did I get you wrong and the GNUstep behaviour matched the one from Apple? > So I have to use 'MATCHES[c]'. But 'MATCHES' use regex, > which I think is too much if I only want to do case-insensitive > comparison. Regular expressions are still missing in GNUstep. With all these fixes only the tests that include %d and the one with matches still fail. But don't erxpect any further progress here. We need Richard to look at the %d problem. Cheers, Fred _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
