Skip to content

feat: add filter to aggregate_functions - #168

Merged
matthias-Q merged 1 commit into
DerekStride:mainfrom
matthias-Q:aggregate_func_filter
Jun 29, 2023
Merged

feat: add filter to aggregate_functions#168
matthias-Q merged 1 commit into
DerekStride:mainfrom
matthias-Q:aggregate_func_filter

Conversation

@matthias-Q

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

I am not sure if the filter_expression should be inside the choice node our outside. Currently, a normal invocation can be followed by the filter_expression. (which is probably fine.)

Closes #167

@matthias-Q
matthias-Q requested review from DerekStride and dmfay June 28, 2023 18:51

@dmfay dmfay left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yeah I don't think it's worth going to the effort of distinguishing invocation-with-filter from a regular invocation without going to the much greater effort of distinguishing aggregates from invocations full stop, and I don't think the latter is time well spent for us at least at the moment

@matthias-Q
matthias-Q merged commit 57ac8a8 into DerekStride:main Jun 29, 2023
@matthias-Q
matthias-Q deleted the aggregate_func_filter branch June 29, 2023 03:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Parsing PostgreSQL FILTER aggregate expressions

2 participants