Add SPARQL-star operators and comparison #179
Conversation
|
PR fails as this requires joachimvh/SPARQLAlgebra.js#98 to be merged first. |
| (<E.BooleanLiteral> op.apply([ (<Quad> left).object, (<Quad> right).object ], context)).coerceEBV(), | ||
| ); | ||
| }, | ||
| false, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why should we not handle invalid lexicals here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(and in the other functions)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Honestly, I'm not sure what this flag does exactly. The documentation didn't help me out much.
What would change when setting this to true?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The flag (when true = default value) makes sure that the current implementation throws an error when passed an invalid literal. (some functions don't want this, since they handle invalid literals themselves (see equality of terms))
I don't think this implementation will run into trouble so we can keep it as is.
| .set( | ||
| [ 'quad', 'quad' ], | ||
| context => ([ left, right ]) => { | ||
| const op: RegularFunction = new RegularFunction(RegularOperator.EQUAL, equality); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we already use the cast made by regularFunctions in index.ts
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can't due that due to the circular dependency.
| import type { ISuperTypeProvider, SuperTypeCallback, TypeCache, GeneralSuperTypeDict } from './TypeHandling'; | ||
| import { getSuperTypeDict } from './TypeHandling'; | ||
|
|
||
| // Determine the relative numerical order of the two given terms. | ||
| /** | ||
| * @param enableExtendedXSDTypes System will behave like when this was true. @deprecated | ||
| */ | ||
| export function orderTypes(termA: RDF.Term | undefined, termB: RDF.Term | undefined, isAscending: boolean, | ||
| export function orderTypes(termA: RDF.Term | undefined, termB: RDF.Term | undefined, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
orderTypes is an exported function, can we just change the behavior like this? (requires major release?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's just do a major update then :-)
The isAscending option felt a bit weird to me, and complicated the implementation too much, so I removed it.
rubensworks
force-pushed
the
feature/rdf-star
branch
from
50fbfe4
to
04af322
Compare
Partially built on top of @jeswr's WIP PR from #161.
@jitsedesmet I changed the ordering logic quite a bit (the old version had a fundamental flaw where
>was considered the opposite to<), so it might be good for you to check if I didn't break anything major (all unit and spec tests still pass).