[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-5479?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17741810#comment-17741810 ]
Gian Merlino commented on CALCITE-5479: --------------------------------------- [~julianhyde], do you think you'll have a chance to look at this before 1.35 is cut? > FamilyOperandTypeChecker is not readily composable in sequences > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CALCITE-5479 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-5479 > Project: Calcite > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: Gian Merlino > Priority: Major > Labels: pull-request-available > Fix For: 1.35.0 > > Time Spent: 50m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > Handling for {{OperandTypes.sequence}} changed in > [33f4ab40bbee26e06209061c35a422f2f1e05371|https://github.com/apache/calcite/commit/33f4ab40bbee26e06209061c35a422f2f1e05371#diff-b0b8d58a792b8e60b9e97717912aecfc6695536f5026ac4d5231d14e34b91566L303-R316] > such that {{iFormalOperand}} passed to subcheckers is no longer always zero, > but is instead: > - Zero if the subchecker is {{FamilyOperandTypeChecker}}. > - Otherwise, the operand number in the overall sequence. > It causes problems for the way we're using sequence checkers in Druid, since > we don't always use {{FamilyOperandTypeChecker}}, but we _do_ assume the old > behavior: that {{iFormalOperand}} is always zero, and therefore we can put > any checker into the sequence without it being "aware" that it is in a > sequence. > I marked this as a bug in case this change was made accidentally. If it was > made for a reason, please let me know. Thanks. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.10#820010)