CREATE should not access its own unbounded entities #488
Conversation
src/ast/ast_rewrite_filters.c
Outdated
| ( | ||
| const cypher_astnode_t *root // root of AST | ||
| ) { | ||
| return false; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
seems like we don't
| // 3. SET | ||
| // 4. DELETE | ||
| // 5. REMOVE | ||
| // 2. SET |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe we need to introduce an optimization that merge this if we can?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There might be situations where we might be able to merge, but the concept of separated CREATE clauses is there for a semantic reasons. users that know what they are doing create this separation on purpose.
| @@ -916,26 +953,6 @@ static VISITOR_STRATEGY _Validate_shortest_path | |||
| return VISITOR_RECURSE; | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // validate a pattern-path expression | |||
| static VISITOR_STRATEGY _Validate_pattern_path | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe this function only served the CREATE clause, which now explicitly calls _Validate_CREATE_Entities
by removing this we get the default behavior which simply recurse, so no real change.
src/ast/ast_validations.c
Outdated
| @@ -1566,21 +1582,135 @@ static VISITOR_STRATEGY _Validate_UNION_Clause | |||
| return VISITOR_RECURSE; | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // qsort comparison function for strings | |||
| static int _compareStrings | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it look like you don't use this
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You're correct, no longer in use.
| redis_graph.query(query) | ||
| self.env.assertTrue(False) | ||
| except redis.exceptions.ResponseError as e: | ||
| self.env.assertContains("Variable `r` already declared", str(e)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why different error message?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In this case (a single CREATE clause) the validation first spots the fact that r is already defined.
in the other cases multiple CREATE clauses r is bounded.
swilly22
changed the title
Resolves #425
The
CREATEclause is not supposed to "see" its own newly created entitiese.g.
CREATE (a {v:e.v+1})-[e:R {v:2}]->()CREATE (a {v:b.v}), (b {v:a.v})