Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

EXCLUDE for columns doesn't work as expected #911

Closed
jgebal opened this issue May 3, 2019 · 2 comments
Closed

EXCLUDE for columns doesn't work as expected #911

jgebal opened this issue May 3, 2019 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@jgebal
Copy link
Member

@jgebal jgebal commented May 3, 2019

When excluding columns, the column is still considered in data-type comparison.
Also, excluding column still impacts column order of expected and actual.

Example:
`
open l_expected for
select to_Char(null) id, 'ok' name from dual;
open l_actual for
select 'ok' name, to_number(null) id from dual;

ut.expect(l_actual).to_equal(l_expected).excude('ID');
`

The above example should work as column ID is exluded and so effective comparison should be on cursors:
open l_expected for select 'ok' name from dual; open l_actual for select 'ok' name from dual;

@lwasylow
Copy link
Member

@lwasylow lwasylow commented May 3, 2019

The excluding or including should happen when we building a cursor details type. I will have a look when back.

@lwasylow
Copy link
Member

@lwasylow lwasylow commented May 8, 2019

I tracked issue to member function cursor details filter columns. It removes excluded columns but not update column position. When the column pop from stack column position has to shift down.

@lwasylow lwasylow self-assigned this May 8, 2019
@lwasylow lwasylow added the bug label May 8, 2019
@jgebal jgebal closed this in #913 May 10, 2019
@lwasylow lwasylow added this to the v3.1.7 milestone Jun 17, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants