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

Posted to issues@calcite.apache.org by "Julian Hyde (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2019/10/02 22:01:00 UTC

[jira] [Commented] (CALCITE-3382) Rename current TUMBLE to "TUMBLE_OLD" and add TUMBLE to Parser

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3382?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16943189#comment-16943189 ] 

Julian Hyde commented on CALCITE-3382:
--------------------------------------

Reviewing your PR, I think there needs to be more acknowledgement in the code of the difficulty of having TUMBLE as a group by function and also as a user-defined table function. Future developers may not be aware of the design discussion we've had over the last weeks. And also acknowledge the fact that we intend obsolete it at some point. I would name it "$TUMBLE", to emphasize the fact that it is not intended to be resolved by name (there are several other functions with "$" in their name).

Is it worth dealing with HOP at the same time?

> Rename current TUMBLE to "TUMBLE_OLD" and add TUMBLE to Parser
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CALCITE-3382
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3382
>             Project: Calcite
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Rui Wang
>            Assignee: Rui Wang
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: pull-request-available
>          Time Spent: 40m
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Per discussion in https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/1457, we should add TUMBLE to parser and rename it to "TUMBLE_OLD".
> "TUMBLE" as an operator name will be left for table-value function TUMBLE.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)