Bug fix for predicate order for queries with a function/lambda select clause #126
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The bug occured when passing a function/lambda as the "select" clause for a query. It wasn't properly detecting that the input to the function/lambda needed to be the fact objects in the order specified by the query roots (and not the internal ordering created by the query plan).
daveraja
deleted the
63-bug-predicate_order-for-queries-with-multiple-joins
branch
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The bug occured when passing a function/lambda as the "select" clause for a query. It wasn't properly detecting that the input to the function/lambda needed to be the fact objects in the order specified by the query roots (and not the internal ordering created by the query plan).