My phone is being crazy with sending replies :(
So if we don't want to use ~ here, I am fine with that. However I do not
want this used for full text searching. Your argument is that its "not a
natural fit" for use in this nullness checking, but that same argument fits
full text searching.
On S
So if we don't want to use ~ here, I am fine with that. However I do not
want this used for full text searching.
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015, 6:07 PM Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> I think we all agree that we want at least the high level intent of an
> HQL query to be understandable without having to keep
I think we all agree that we want at least the high level intent of an
HQL query to be understandable without having to keep a reference
sheet of its special symbols at hand.
I would interpret that "~" symbol differently, so I don't think it's
suited to imply some special meaning related to "null"
Sorry, but I agree with Brett. CONTAINS is a much more natural way to
perform a full-text search, especially for those coming from SQL.
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 1:47 AM Gunnar Morling wrote:
> I like the idea of a new operator, but I side with Sanne that "~"
> would be useful for similarity/full
