You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to commits@calcite.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2020/08/24 20:56:45 UTC

[GitHub] [calcite] julianhyde commented on pull request #2119: [CALCITE-4183] FilterSetOpTransposeRule constructor should allow for …

julianhyde commented on pull request #2119:
URL: https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/2119#issuecomment-679361883


   I am not sure we need this. I am not denying that the fix works. But something similar could be accomplished in client code without any changes to Calcite. Without the `withOperandFor` method the test case would be 1 or 2 lines longer - not nothing, is it worth it?
   
   I'm worried that people will thing that `withOperandFor` methods are the ONLY way to customize rules. And post CALCITE-3923, they're syntactic sugar but not necessary.


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org