Simplify prepared statement parameters handling #35
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
a-urth
requested review from
hashhar,
nineinchnick and
losipiuk
and removed request for
hashhar
|
@a-urth sorry for not responding for over 2 years, but can you rebase it? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Problem
If my understanding of the logic below is correct then named arguments which are not correctly prefixed (X-Trino-...) are considered as prepared statement's parameters. If so then logic was a bit convoluted - for example there was no need to check for empty prepared statement header for each argument.
Solution
Restructure argument parsing logic so headers and non headers (prepared statement parameters) cases are more explicit and verbose. Add corresponding comments and improve readability.