[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-7224?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Zhen Chen updated CALCITE-7224:
-------------------------------
    Description: 
Currently, SqlOperator and its related classes use individual boolean fields 
(e.g., isDeterministic, isDynamic, maybe isIdempotent) to represent various 
function properties. This approach has several drawbacks as the number of 
properties grows:
* ​​Maintenance Overhead:​​ Adding a new property requires adding a new method 
and field across multiple classes.
* ​​API Bloat:​​ The interface becomes cluttered with numerous getter methods.

  was:
Currently, SqlOperatorand its related classes use individual boolean fields 
(e.g., isDeterministic, isDynamic, maybe isIdempotent) to represent various 
function properties. This approach has several drawbacks as the number of 
properties grows:
* ​​Maintenance Overhead:​​ Adding a new property requires adding a new method 
and field across multiple classes.
* ​​API Bloat:​​ The interface becomes cluttered with numerous getter methods.


> Refactor function property system to use a unified flag field
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CALCITE-7224
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-7224
>             Project: Calcite
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: core
>    Affects Versions: 1.40.0
>            Reporter: Zhen Chen
>            Priority: Minor
>
> Currently, SqlOperator and its related classes use individual boolean fields 
> (e.g., isDeterministic, isDynamic, maybe isIdempotent) to represent various 
> function properties. This approach has several drawbacks as the number of 
> properties grows:
> * ​​Maintenance Overhead:​​ Adding a new property requires adding a new 
> method and field across multiple classes.
> * ​​API Bloat:​​ The interface becomes cluttered with numerous getter methods.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

Reply via email to