[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3679?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17109457#comment-17109457 ]
Ritesh edited comment on CALCITE-3679 at 5/17/20, 12:38 PM: ------------------------------------------------------------ Yes, you did copy-paste comments without changing the text. As I said, it was my "first impression" but it was not incorrect. _*> Quoting my first comment in PR "This PR is incomplete in terms of functionality and requires alot of refactoring and test cases addition." I understand comments are important But I was more concerned with getting approach reviewed first, I will be more careful with the words. I will correct comments in PR :)*_ Yes, a bug does need a description. Especially when your only description is a link to a web page. (Which may change or disappear in future.) That web page has 7 functions and you only seem to have implemented 1. Implementing just one is fine, if you say you are implementing one. _+*> Agreed, I will update the description after closure on the scope.*+_ No, don't go tell me to read the PR to figure out the scope. You're just saying "it is what it is", which is not helpful. The scope needs to be described in the JIRA case. _*> I didn't mean to say "it is what it is", All I meant was if the scope is not clear it was better to be highlighted in the beginning, lets try not raise concern after 5 months of PR raised where alot of effort has already been invested.*_ I still believe that we need to get the type system sorted out early - i.e. in this PR. _*> Let me check on that and get back. :)*_ I also think that we can get this PR to a state where it can be committed. But realistically, 1.23 is too soon. It will take a few iterations. _*> Agreed, PR should be committed if it is in that state. I didn't intend to be pushy for 1.23 but I also don't want this PR to stay unmerged for long.*_ _*Let me update the PR with your feedback :)*_ was (Author: ritesh.kapoor): Yes, you did copy-paste comments without changing the text. As I said, it was my "first impression" but it was not incorrect. _*> Quoting my first comment in PR "This PR is incomplete in terms of functionality and requires alot of refactoring and test cases addition." I understand comments are important But I was more concerned with getting approach reviewed first, I will be more careful with the words. I will correct comments in PR :)*_ Yes, a bug does need a description. Especially when your only description is a link to a web page. (Which may change or disappear in future.) That web page has 7 functions and you only seem to have implemented 1. Implementing just one is fine, if you say you are implementing one. _+*> Agreed, I will update the description after closure on the scope.*+_ No, don't go tell me to read the PR to figure out the scope. You're just saying "it is what it is", which is not helpful. The scope needs to be described in the JIRA case. _*> I didn't mean to say "it is what it is", All I meant was if the scope is not clear it was better to be highlighted in the beginning, lets not raise concern after 5 months of PR raised where alot of effort has already been invested.*_ I still believe that we need to get the type system sorted out early - i.e. in this PR. _*> Let me check on that and get back. :)*_ I also think that we can get this PR to a state where it can be committed. But realistically, 1.23 is too soon. It will take a few iterations. _*> Agreed, PR should be committed if it is in that state. I didn't intend to be pushy for 1.23 but I also don't want this PR to stay unmerged for long.*_ _*Let me update the PR with your feedback :)*_ > Allow lambda expressions in SQL queries > --------------------------------------- > > Key: CALCITE-3679 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3679 > Project: Calcite > Issue Type: New Feature > Reporter: Ritesh > Assignee: Ritesh > Priority: Major > Labels: pull-request-available > Attachments: [CALCITE-3679]_Basic_implementation.patch > > Time Spent: 5h 40m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > [https://teradata.github.io/presto/docs/0.167-t/functions/lambda.html] -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)