Re: Fwd: Re: [Modeling-users] ec.fetch and SQL "in"

[Sebastien B. <sbi...@us...>]

Yannick Gingras <yan...@sa...> wrote:
> On July 8, 2003 10:11 am, Yannick Gingras wrote:
> > > * The syntax really is '<attr> in/not in [ <v1>, <v2>, ...]', i.e. wi=
th
> > >   square brackets, and it will remain as-is --as said in the docs I'm
> > >   not a grammar nor a spark expert, and it would take me too long to
> > >   allow parens '(v1, v2, ...)'  here.
> >
> > This patch works like a charm !
> >
> >  : )
> >
> > Thanks and congratulation for this instant implementation !
> >
> >  : )

Okay, I'll add this in the next release then. Need to work on some more
unittests, but the patch itself for QualifierParser and SQLExpression
will probably remain as-is.

  Any comment on lower-cased operators, anyone?

  The impact is mainly the following one: it increases the number of
  keywords that you cannot use as attributes' names in queries. To put
  it explicitely: you'll get a syntax error if one of your attributes in
  the qualifier strings is either 'AND', 'OR', NOT', 'like', 'ilike',
  well, you get the picture; by allowing upper/lower case versions of
  these operators, the list of reserved keywords is increased of a
  factor two. I do not think that anyone would use 'and' or 'not' as an
  attribute's name, but who knows...

> Of course it should be documented that this kind of fetch is super
> simpler to build with:
>=20
>  "val in %s" % repr(list(vallist))
>=20
> repr() of a list spit out exactly the string you want.

  Agreed, but "val in %s"%list(vallist) is a bit shorted, isn't it ;)

> BTW there is and option in mailman for the replies to go directly to
> the list instead of the sender.  I think it would be nice to turn it
> on...

  Well, yes, but... I won't go into that discussion here :) I did not
turn it on because I mainly agree with sourceforge's policy (see
https://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=3D6693&group_id=3D1 and
the pointers it contains)

  As for me, I've never been bitten by the nasty 'Oops I did not want to
  send that personal/offensive/mean/etc. material to the whole list',
  but I surely do not want it to happen! Of course it has already
  happened in the past that someone is replying to me by mistake rather
  than to the list, in these cases I notify the poster of its possible
  error and asks if the post could be forwarded to the list --it's not
  that frequent, and I can surely live with that. And it also happened
  that the original post was really directed to me, because for whatever
  reasons the original poster did not want its message to appear on the
  list.

    Hoping you won't be too upset by this answer ;)

        Regards,

-- S=E9bastien.