[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-6869?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17932561#comment-17932561
]
Zhen Chen commented on CALCITE-6869:
------------------------------------
[~zabetak] Thank you for your reply. In my opinion, not many people will read
those documents carefully, and this description does not specify where the
problem will occur. When problems occur, most developers look for problems or
solutions in the code, and there are not many rules that will have this
problem. In my opinion, it is reasonable to mention this issue in the rules.
What do you think?
> Add instructions for the alias loss problem in ProjectRemoveRule
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-6869
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-6869
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Zhen Chen
> Assignee: Zhen Chen
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: pull-request-available
>
> We should add a description of the alias loss problem and the current calcite
> solution in ProjectRemoveRule to avoid this issue being raised again.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
