Ok :)
So I Will test it tomorrow ( the man who doesn't understand your
meaning/joke ;))
So let's wait .. will surely be an amazing upgrade.
Thanks a lot Wes.
Le 22 mai 2014 à 03:08, Wes Freeman a écrit :
I'll give you a date of tomorrow with confidence +/- 6 months. No
idea. :) Last time, t
I'll give you a date of tomorrow with confidence +/- 6 months. No
idea. :) Last time, the RC1 to release time was less than a month, though.
I'd love to hear official estimates.
Wes
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Michael Azerhad
wrote:
> Oh cool :)
>
> Do you know when should the 2.1 RELEASE e
Oh cool :)
Do you know when should the 2.1 RELEASE emerge ?
I searched on the Net but in vain.
Thanks a lot,
Michael
On Thursday, May 22, 2014 1:14:21 AM UTC+2, Wes Freeman wrote:
>
> It looks like it's fixed in 2.1-rc1.
>
> Wes
>
> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Michael Azerhad
>
> > wr
It looks like it's fixed in 2.1-rc1.
Wes
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Michael Azerhad
wrote:
> Thanks to this law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Morgan%27s_laws
>
> I transform the part:
> WHERE NOT(c.name = "Ferrari" AND 1=1)
>
> to
>
> WHERE NOT(c.name = "Ferrari") OR NOT(1=1)
>
> It wou
Thanks to this law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Morgan%27s_laws
I transform the part:
WHERE NOT(c.name = "Ferrari" AND 1=1)
to
WHERE NOT(c.name = "Ferrari") OR NOT(1=1)
It would be good if an AND expression could be evaluated in a NOT
expression.
On Wednesday, May 21, 2014 11:39:01 P
Even this case:
MATCH (c:Car)
WHERE NOT(c.name = "Ferrari" AND 1=1)
RETURN c.name
behaves like:
MATCH (c:Car)
WHERE NOT(c.name = "Ferrari") AND NOT (1=1) //explaining why 0 rows are
returned ! (Indeed NOT (1=1) is never matched)
RETURN c.name
Why? It seems that an AND expression into
