-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 165
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
GH-2078 property path negation and inversion #2080
GH-2078 property path negation and inversion #2080
Conversation
compliance/sparql/src/test/java/org/eclipse/rdf4j/sail/memory/MemorySPARQL11QueryTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...queryparser/sparql/src/test/java/org/eclipse/rdf4j/query/parser/sparql/SPARQLParserTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
compliance/sparql/src/test/java/org/eclipse/rdf4j/sail/memory/MemorySPARQL12QueryTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
compliance/sparql/src/test/java/org/eclipse/rdf4j/sail/memory/MemorySPARQL11W3CQueryTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
compliance/sparql/src/test/java/org/eclipse/rdf4j/sail/memory/MemorySPARQL10W3CQueryTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
8adb315
to
de8f9d8
Compare
I've pushed what I think is a decent fix for the immediate issue. @hmottestad this is really a bug fix and should be merged to master, but unfortunately the feature branch is based off of develop. Could you rebase and target master? Alternatively, we can merge this and then cherry pick back onto master. |
ACtually just realized i didn't run all compliance tests - I think I may have overlooked a corner case. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm fine with merging this as-is. A squash-merge + cherry-pick to get it onto master is fine with me. I'm on the fence whether we should log a separate issue to refactor the SPARQL parser a bit, make it less of a tangle.
Thank for fixing this @jeenbroekstra I've added a couple more tests, and one of them looks a bit wonky. It's not so much incorrect I think as it is just a bit bloated. This is the query:
And this is the plan:
Should be something like this:
|
Yes, I did notice that too, and it is a bug of some sort (the produced algebra is not incorrect, just more complex than it needs to be - it essentially duplicate the entire tree for both object list arguments). It is not directly related to this particular bug though. I suggest you remove that test again and log a separate issue. |
Huh, look at that, new feature in github I think: you can convert a pull request back to draft (option appeared for me top-right, underneath the list of reviewers). |
57d8907
to
14cb209
Compare
Signed-off-by: Håvard Ottestad <hmottestad@gmail.com>
- added test cases to ComplexSPARQLQueryTest
Signed-off-by: Håvard Ottestad <hmottestad@gmail.com>
14cb209
to
44e6367
Compare
GitHub issue resolved: #2078
Briefly describe the changes proposed in this PR:
PR Author Checklist:
Note: we merge all feature pull requests using squash and merge. See RDF4J git merge strategy for more details.