[jira] [Commented] (PIG-3089) Implicit relation names
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3089?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13531342#comment-13531342 ] Jonathan Coveney commented on PIG-3089: --- Thejas: I implemented your suggested here https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3090 > Implicit relation names > --- > > Key: PIG-3089 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3089 > Project: Pig > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: grunt, parser >Reporter: Russell Jurney >Assignee: Jonathan Coveney > > A = load foo; > B = load bar; > filter A by id > 5; > join A_1 by id, B by id; > // or A_filter > foreach A_1_B generate id; > store into foobar; // A_1_B_1 or A_filter_B_generate > Or some such routine? > We don't have to be explicit no more! -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (PIG-3089) Implicit relation names
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3089?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13531339#comment-13531339 ] Russell Jurney commented on PIG-3089: - I sit there for minutes trying to name my relations. Thats what I want to fix. I like Thejas' suggestion better. > Implicit relation names > --- > > Key: PIG-3089 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3089 > Project: Pig > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: grunt, parser >Reporter: Russell Jurney >Assignee: Jonathan Coveney > > A = load foo; > B = load bar; > filter A by id > 5; > join A_1 by id, B by id; > // or A_filter > foreach A_1_B generate id; > store into foobar; // A_1_B_1 or A_filter_B_generate > Or some such routine? > We don't have to be explicit no more! -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (PIG-3089) Implicit relation names
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3089?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13529171#comment-13529171 ] Jonathan Coveney commented on PIG-3089: --- I like this idea, generally. Daniel and I had discussed something similar a while back. Agree that we need to pin down the syntax. What are we trying to fix? Is it extra keystrokes? Is it a proliferation of useless relation names? I think there are a couple of things we can make better. I think that Thejas's idea is one of them...a syntax to refer to the previously defined relation would be really cool. I think that should be another JIRA. > Implicit relation names > --- > > Key: PIG-3089 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3089 > Project: Pig > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: grunt, parser >Reporter: Russell Jurney >Assignee: Jonathan Coveney > > A = load foo; > B = load bar; > filter A by id > 5; > join A_1 by id, B by id; > // or A_filter > foreach A_1_B generate id; > store into foobar; // A_1_B_1 or A_filter_B_generate > Or some such routine? > We don't have to be explicit no more! -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (PIG-3089) Implicit relation names
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3089?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13529125#comment-13529125 ] Thejas M Nair commented on PIG-3089: In my opinion, too many rules for implicit relation names would make pig scripts (written by others) hard to read, specially for people who are new to pig. I think it is better to just allow name of preceding relation to be referred using a special notation. > Implicit relation names > --- > > Key: PIG-3089 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3089 > Project: Pig > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: grunt, parser >Reporter: Russell Jurney >Assignee: Jonathan Coveney > > A = load foo; > B = load bar; > filter A by id > 5; > join A_1 by id, B by id; > // or A_filter > foreach A_1_B generate id; > store into foobar; // A_1_B_1 or A_filter_B_generate > Or some such routine? > We don't have to be explicit no more! -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (PIG-3089) Implicit relation names
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3089?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13528678#comment-13528678 ] Russell Jurney commented on PIG-3089: - The other way to do this is... just stick with the last defined relation. Although... I can see that getting tricky to keep up with internally? Unless we just reassign after doing the above? > Implicit relation names > --- > > Key: PIG-3089 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3089 > Project: Pig > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: grunt, parser >Reporter: Russell Jurney >Assignee: Jonathan Coveney > > A = load foo; > B = load bar; > filter A by id > 5; > join A_1 by id, B by id; > // or A_filter > foreach A_1_B generate id; > store into foobar; // A_1_B_1 or A_filter_B_generate > Or some such routine? > We don't have to be explicit no more! -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
