Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
If I parse query like this: SELECT lcase(dummy.b) FROM dummy ORDER BY dummy.a, LCASE(dummy.b) in SELECT I get this: ["SELECT"]=> array(1) { [0]=> array(4) { ["expr_type"]=> string(8) "function" ["alias"]=> bool(false) ["base_expr"]=> string(5) "lcase" ["sub_tree"]=> array(1) { [0]=> array(3) { ["expr_type"]=> string(6) "colref" ["base_expr"]=> string(7) "dummy.b" ["sub_tree"]=> bool(false) } } } } but in ORDER BY I get only this: ["ORDER"]=> array(2) { [0]=> array(3) { ["type"]=> string(10) "expression" ["base_expr"]=> string(7) "dummy.a" ["direction"]=> string(3) "ASC" } [1]=> array(3) { ["type"]=> string(10) "expression" ["base_expr"]=> string(14) "LCASE(dummy.b)" ["direction"]=> string(3) "ASC" } } i.e. ORDER components are not parsed, functions not identified, and it's hard to tell what's going on there. Older versions of the parser produced this: ["ORDER"]=> array(2) { [0]=> array(4) { ["type"]=> string(10) "expression" ["base_expr"]=> string(7) "dummy.a" ["direction"]=> string(3) "ASC" ["sub_tree"]=> array(1) { [0]=> array(4) { ["expr_type"]=> string(6) "colref" ["alias"]=> string(9) "`dummy.a`" ["base_expr"]=> string(7) "dummy.a" ["sub_tree"]=> bool(false) } } } [1]=> array(4) { ["type"]=> string(10) "expression" ["base_expr"]=> string(14) "LCASE(dummy.b)" ["direction"]=> string(3) "ASC" ["sub_tree"]=> array(1) { [0]=> array(4) { ["expr_type"]=> string(10) "expression" ["alias"]=> string(16) "`LCASE(dummy.b)`" ["base_expr"]=> string(14) "LCASE(dummy.b)" ["sub_tree"]=> array(2) { [0]=> array(3) { ["expr_type"]=> string(8) "function" ["base_expr"]=> string(5) "LCASE" ["sub_tree"]=> bool(false) } [1]=> array(3) { ["expr_type"]=> string(10) "expression" ["base_expr"]=> string(9) "(dummy.b)" ["sub_tree"]=> array(1) { [0]=> array(3) { ["expr_type"]=> string(6) "colref" ["base_expr"]=> string(7) "dummy.b" ["sub_tree"]=> bool(false) } } } } } } } which is much more useful. Can it be brought back?
Original issue reported on code.google.com by smalys...@gmail.com on 13 Jun 2012 at 1:07
smalys...@gmail.com
I have fixed your problem, see REV 287.
Original comment by pho...@gmx.de on 14 Jun 2012 at 7:03
pho...@gmx.de
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
smalys...@gmail.com
on 13 Jun 2012 at 1:07