Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CESQL v1 review changes #1286
CESQL v1 review changes #1286
Changes from 2 commits
fe63675
0f23ded
53d6890
dca5140
4c387fe
3151952
12c7147
da5f574
864dff4
8b871e4
24619e5
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Isn't the entire representation of, or even access to, errors out of scope of the spec, not just the empty set of errors?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah that's a good point - I was trying to not specify that as I wrote the error stuff (apart from specifying the types of errors you could get). Let me clarify that!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like this better. Do you think we need to add something like:
? Is the first sentence true?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not 100% sure here, if you look at section 4.1 it states that:
But, as far as I can tell the SDKs implement the fail fast mode instead of the complete evaluation mode.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
w/o any result... is that true even in the SDKs and Knative? I was assuming the was result 'false'.
I'm having a memory of us discussing what happens when a nested expression errors when that expression is part of an AND - doesn't it result in a false for the nested expression and then false again due to that side of the AND being false? Or am I thinking about some other situation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In terms of w/o any result, I think the problem (from a spec standpoint at least) is what type should the return value have? For example, if my query is
LEFT(missingattribute, 10)
, then should I get(false, missing attribute error)
as my return value? Does it make more sense to return("", missing attribute error)
?But, similarly if my expression is
LEFT(missingattribute, 10) LIKE prefix%
, then having a return value of(false, missing attribute error)
would be what I would expect while a return value of("", missing attribute error)
would not be what I expect.Perhaps it makes sense to say something along the lines of "Fail fast mode: When an error is triggered, the evaluation is interrupted and returns the zero value for the return type of the root operation, along with the error". WDYT @duglin ?