Add Support for TSQL NEXT VALUE FOR

[manticore-projects]

fixes #1177

I do not think, that the previously implemented NEXTVAL FOR is correct, but I kept it in order to avoid breaking anything. Which RDBMS would support or request for NEXTVAL FOR please?

With this PR, both NEXTVAL FOR and NEXT VALUE FOR will be supported. Oracle/DB2 foo.nextval is not affected.
If we found out, that NEXTVAL FOR was obsolete, we should clean this up optionally.

[manticore-projects]

Pardon my stupid question: why does it keep referring to merged previous PRs and changes? How would I get rid of this please?
It seems like I was not using GIT correctly yet.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.2%) to 88.69% when pulling de55061 on manticore-projects:master into 86b613c on JSQLParser:master.

[manticore-projects]

Add support for CTEs in MERGE, UPDATE, DELETE (but not yet for CTEs with VALUE LISTs)

[manticore-projects]

Please please please: Deactivate the rules "PMD.CyclomaticComplexity", "PMD.ExcessiveMethodLength", "PMD.NPathComplexity" for Codazy! These do not make any sense for the toString() and deParse() methods and right now I need to activate these rules in PMD only to annotate every method with @SuppressWarnings({"PMD.CyclomaticComplexity", "PMD.ExcessiveMethodLength", "PMD.NPathComplexity"}).
I am not against Code quality validation at all, but this insane.

[manticore-projects]

One more thing: Code Duplication. As far as I understand it, the toString() methods do more or less the same as the Deparser.deparse() methods. Would that not be the right time to overhaul this and to replace the code of the toString() methods with a static method Deparser.deparse(Statement st)?

[manticore-projects]

fixes #1176

[wumpz]

Yes, this commit behaviour is when you continue to work on your old PRs branch. Since I use "squash & merge" to merge your pull request your PR branch will not be merged into master but a single commit is created by git that merges your final overall changes.

So could it be, that here are more changes than you liked? It seems to be a big PR.

[manticore-projects]

On Fri, 2021-04-30 at 15:04 -0700, Tobias wrote: So could it be, that here are more changes than you liked? It seems to be a big PR.

No, the PR is correct, please pull it. I will use squash properly next time. Sorry for any incenvenience. Cheers It is only big because I fixed ANY and every PMD exception. Please consider adjusting the rules in Codazy, I can't do that from here.

[wumpz]

Could you first remove the conflict? Then I will merge.

[manticore-projects]

Done, cheers!

…

On Sat, 2021-05-01 at 12:29 -0700, Tobias wrote: Could you first remove the conflict? Then I will merge. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

[manticore-projects]

Fixes #1186

[wumpz]

Now there are changes in 51 files??? Really?

[manticore-projects]

Sorry, I know it is not ideal but what am I supposed to do? the PR fixes 4 issues from the list they all touch the JavaCC Parser files and ammend the Java Objects and the Deparser when submitting, your code checks complained so I hade to fix these too (which affected 40 files alone) which gave a lot of conflicting changes, making it really difficult to split up And last but not least, I work on JSQLParser in order to complete the JSQLFormatter. Every change in JSQLParser affects the formatting and I need a working JSQLParser  immediately after I have fixed something. So how would you want to proceed please? You pulled the #1189 first (understandable, because its simple) and now the PR is conflicting again. I will fix it again.

…

On Mon, 2021-05-10 at 12:58 -0700, Tobias wrote: Now there are changes in 51 files??? Really? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.