[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3679?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17109457#comment-17109457
]
Ritesh edited comment on CALCITE-3679 at 5/17/20, 12:38 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, you did copy-paste comments without changing the text. As I said, it was
my "first impression" but it was not incorrect.
_*> Quoting my first comment in PR "This PR is incomplete in terms of
functionality and requires alot of refactoring and test cases addition." I
understand comments are important But I was more concerned with getting
approach reviewed first, I will be more careful with the words. I will correct
comments in PR :)*_
Yes, a bug does need a description. Especially when your only description is a
link to a web page. (Which may change or disappear in future.) That web page
has 7 functions and you only seem to have implemented 1. Implementing just one
is fine, if you say you are implementing one.
_+*> Agreed, I will update the description after closure on the scope.*+_
No, don't go tell me to read the PR to figure out the scope. You're just saying
"it is what it is", which is not helpful. The scope needs to be described in
the JIRA case.
_*> I didn't mean to say "it is what it is", All I meant was if the scope is
not clear it was better to be highlighted in the beginning, lets try not raise
concern after 5 months of PR raised where alot of effort has already been
invested.*_
I still believe that we need to get the type system sorted out early - i.e. in
this PR.
_*> Let me check on that and get back. :)*_
I also think that we can get this PR to a state where it can be committed. But
realistically, 1.23 is too soon. It will take a few iterations.
_*> Agreed, PR should be committed if it is in that state. I didn't intend to
be pushy for 1.23 but I also don't want this PR to stay unmerged for long.*_
_*Let me update the PR with your feedback :)*_
was (Author: ritesh.kapoor):
Yes, you did copy-paste comments without changing the text. As I said, it was
my "first impression" but it was not incorrect.
_*> Quoting my first comment in PR "This PR is incomplete in terms of
functionality and requires alot of refactoring and test cases addition." I
understand comments are important But I was more concerned with getting
approach reviewed first, I will be more careful with the words. I will correct
comments in PR :)*_
Yes, a bug does need a description. Especially when your only description is a
link to a web page. (Which may change or disappear in future.) That web page
has 7 functions and you only seem to have implemented 1. Implementing just one
is fine, if you say you are implementing one.
_+*> Agreed, I will update the description after closure on the scope.*+_
No, don't go tell me to read the PR to figure out the scope. You're just saying
"it is what it is", which is not helpful. The scope needs to be described in
the JIRA case.
_*> I didn't mean to say "it is what it is", All I meant was if the scope is
not clear it was better to be highlighted in the beginning, lets not raise
concern after 5 months of PR raised where alot of effort has already been
invested.*_
I still believe that we need to get the type system sorted out early - i.e. in
this PR.
_*> Let me check on that and get back. :)*_
I also think that we can get this PR to a state where it can be committed. But
realistically, 1.23 is too soon. It will take a few iterations.
_*> Agreed, PR should be committed if it is in that state. I didn't intend to
be pushy for 1.23 but I also don't want this PR to stay unmerged for long.*_
_*Let me update the PR with your feedback :)*_
> Allow lambda expressions in SQL queries
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-3679
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3679
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Ritesh
> Assignee: Ritesh
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available
> Attachments: [CALCITE-3679]_Basic_implementation.patch
>
> Time Spent: 5h 40m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> [https://teradata.github.io/presto/docs/0.167-t/functions/lambda.html]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
