Project

General

Profile

Feature #9477

implement missing QUERY handle methods/attributes

Added by Eric Faulhaber almost 2 years ago. Updated 13 days ago.

Status:
WIP
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Alexandru Lungu
Target version:
-
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:

0%

billable:
No
vendor_id:
GCD
case_num:
version_reported:
version_resolved:
reviewer:
production:
No
env_name:
topics:

Related issues

Related to Base Language - Bug #10277: Adaptive Query REPOSITION statement/method error handling improvement Test

History

#1 Updated by Eric Faulhaber almost 2 years ago

  • methods
    • FIRST-OF (none/none)
    • LAST-OF (none/none)
    • REPOSITION-BACKWARDS (full/basic)
    • REPOSITION-FORWARDS (full/basic)
  • attributes
    • CACHE (maybe, very implementation-specific) (also noted in #6459)

Note that FIRST-OF/LAST-OF are already implemented; the gap marking is wrong. It is strange, because these are gap marked in the expression.rules attrs map, even though they are methods which accept a parameter. When reports are run, instances appear as METH_LOGICAL, but pick up the the gap marking from the attrs map (none/none at the time of this writing for both) from the expressions.rules gap marking rule set.

#2 Updated by Eric Faulhaber almost 2 years ago

  • Tracker changed from Bug to Feature

#3 Updated by Constantin Asofiei over 1 year ago

Alexandru, do you have any insight about the reposition methods in the first note? I recall seeing mentions about reposition, in some tasks (where also Stanislav was working).

#4 Updated by Alexandru Lungu over 1 year ago

REPOSITION-BACKWARDS (full/basic)
REPOSITION-FORWARDS (full/basic)

AFAIK, these are both supported at conversion time and run-time. I made unit tests on #9724 for both these constructs on single-table queries (only scrolling, indexed-repositioned/non-indexed-repositioned, browsed/non-browsed). All worked OK. I was planning to extend the work to multi-table queries, but I doubt there is a lack of functionality there.

The only concern may be related to performance, because these constructs do next, next, next or prev, prev, prev to succeed. But I can't find a proper alternative ATM.

PS: I think the constructs are :REPOSITION-BACKWARD and :REPOSITION-FORWARD.

#5 Updated by Greg Shah 13 days ago

I've fixed the gap marking for first-of and last-of in 11747a. For reposition-*, there is a note in the gap marking ruleset stating "error reporting TODO". If that accurate or should I mark them as full rt support?

#6 Updated by Alexandru Lungu 13 days ago

  • Status changed from New to WIP
  • Assignee set to Alexandru Lungu

I've fixed the gap marking for first-of and last-of in 11747a. For reposition-*, there is a note in the gap marking ruleset stating "error reporting TODO". If that accurate or should I mark them as full rt support?

I am assessing now.

#7 Updated by Alexandru Lungu 13 days ago

  • Related to Bug #10277: Adaptive Query REPOSITION statement/method error handling improvement added

#8 Updated by Alexandru Lungu 13 days ago

#10277 indeed doesn't fix the error handling or REPOSITION-BACKWARDS and REPOSITION-FORWARDS. The error occurring is still transformed to false unconditionally (no matter the block on error condition or no-error syntax).
Thus, these two construct still have an error handling gap. I will work on this tomorrow to generate a full set of tests and deliver a fix.

Also available in: Atom PDF