[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-6869?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17932604#comment-17932604
]
Stamatis Zampetakis commented on CALCITE-6869:
----------------------------------------------
[~jensen] I am not in favor of copy-pasting comments in every rule that creates
a project operator. Losing aliases during optimization is a general fact so if
there is documentation that clearly explains that then we don't need something
more. If you think you can make the existing documentation better or find a
better place to talk about losing aliases then that would be useful but the
rules is not an appropriate place.
When developers/users encounter a problem they should also search the bug
tracker or google before diving into the code to find a solution. Hopefully,
when that happens the appropriate JIRA or documentation page should pop-up and
inform them about the expected behavior.
> 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)
