Hi Craig,
[...]
CLR: And another negative test for HAVING that uses a term that's not
an aggregate.
SELECT department, AVG(weeklyhours) FROM Employee GROUP BY department
HAVING middlename != NULL
MBO: OK, then we are back to the original negative query which had a
HAVING clause: HAVING firstname = 'emp1first'. But I can add this, too.
Yes, please. It's a different negative test from others because it's a
boolean expression (ok) using non-aggregate terms (bad).
Just for my understanding: it is ok to use a non-aggregate expression as
long as it is a grouping expression, correct?
I added a new negative test to class Having:
SELECT department, AVG(weeklyhours) FROM Employee
GROUP BY department HAVING firstname == 'emp1First'
JPOX does not catch this error.
I propose the following:
- I check in the change with the new negative test.
- I reopen issue JDO-245.
- I really think the title of JDO-245 talking about "having clause
refering fields which are not part of the result clause" is misleading,
because the result clause does not matter here. I would like to change
the title.
- I would like to move the test class from the result package to jdoql.
What do you think?
Regards Michael
--
Michael Bouschen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Engineering GmbH
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.tech.spree.de/
Tel.:++49/30/235 520-33 Buelowstr. 66
Fax.:++49/30/2175 2012 D-10783 Berlin
