[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2555?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16617226#comment-16617226
]
Vladimir Sitnikov commented on CALCITE-2555:
--------------------------------------------
{quote}you haven't checked that the issue exists or not...never reproduced the
original issue; but run "some guesses" and reported that you don't know if its
there?{quote}
Apparently I was checking just the latest version of PR831.
{quote}but run "some guesses" and reported that you don't know if its there?
how did you know that you run the "right checks" {quote}
The updated code included simplyStrong->simplifyStrong recursion only, so that
was the case I was testing.
simplifyStrong does not recurse down to AND/OR, so there's no much sense in
testing those cases either.
{quote}if you haven't reproduced the original issue?{quote}
The code itself suggests and obvious interesting case (heavily nested eq).
For other cases there's fuzzer.
> RexSimplify: >=(true, null) could be simplified to null
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-2555
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2555
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Affects Versions: 1.17.0
> Reporter: Vladimir Sitnikov
> Assignee: Julian Hyde
> Priority: Major
> Labels: newbie
>
> {code:java}
> @Test public void simplifyComparisonWithNull() {
> checkSimplify2(ge(trueLiteral, falseLiteral), "true", "true");
> checkSimplify2(ge(trueLiteral, nullBool), "null", "false");
> checkSimplify2(ge(nullBool, nullBool), "null", "false");
> }
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
