sqlpp11/ChangeLog.md

Important changes in sqlpp11

Breaking changes in 0.36:

Abstract:

One of the main motivations of sqlpp11 is to prevent SQL programming mistakes at compile time. The following changes prevent reported mishaps.

• from(a,b) not allowed anymore, please use explicit joins
• where(true) not allowed anymore, please use .unconditionally() or sqlpp::value(true)
• some_sql_expression and true not allowed anymore, please use tab.col == sqlpp::value(true) if you really want to express this.
• having(expression) requires expression to be made of aggregates, e.g. columns named in group_by() or aggregate functions like count() or constant values.
• where() and having accept only one parameter

Explicit joins required:

Up until sqlpp11-0.35 you could write something like

auto result = db(select(all_of(a), all_of(b))
                 .from(a,b)
                 .where(someCondition));

Using this syntax in from(), it was expected to have the join condition implicitly in the where() call. But there is no reliable way to tell whether or not that condition is there. Or, if there definitely is none, whether it was omitted on purpose or by accident. In one case, an accidentally omitted join condition in the where() brought a production system to a screeching halt.

In order to prevent this in the future, sqlpp11 now requires you to join table explicitly, including an explicit join condition, e.g.

auto result = db(select(all_of(a), all_of(b))
                 .from(a.join(b).on(a.b == b.id))
                 .where(someCondition));

Most joins, (join/inner_join, left_outer_join, right_outer_join and outer_join) require a join condition to given via on(). The join condition has to be some sqlpp11 boolean expression.

In those rare cases, when you really need a cross join, you can also use cross_join() which has no join condition, of course.

auto result = db(select(all_of(a), all_of(b))
                 .from(a.cross_join(b))
                 .where(someCondition));

Use .unconditionally()

If you want to select/update/remove all rows, earlier versions of sqlpp11 required the use of where(true). Since version 0.36, use unconditionally(), for instance:

auto result = db(select(all_of(t)).from(t).unconditionally());

Use sqlpp::value() to wrap bool values in boolean expressions

Lets say you had

struct X
{
    int a;
    int b;
};
auto x = X{};

Then earlier versions of sqlpp11 would compile the following expression:

select(all_of(t)).from(t).where(x.a == x.a or t.b == t.b);

What you probably meant was:

select(all_of(t)).from(t).where(t.a == x.a and t.b == x.b);

In order to prevent this kind of mistake, boolean operators in sql expressions require sqlpp boolean expressions as operators. The library also requires the types of the left/right hand side operands of a comparison to be different, so that t.a < t.a does not compile any more.

In the rare case you really have a bool value that you want to use a boolean sql expression, you have to wrap it in sqlpp::value(x), e.g.

select(all_of(t)).from(t).where(sqlpp::value(x.a == 17) and t.b == x.b);

having() requires aggregate expressions

In older versions, the following code was allowed:

select(all_of(t)).from(t).where(t.a > 7).having(t.b != "");

As of sqlpp11-0.36, the having argument must be made of aggregate columns or functions, e.g.

select(all_of(t)).from(t).unconditionally().group_by(t.b).having(t.b != "", avg(t.c) < 42);

where() and having accept only one expression

In older versions, where() and having() would accept more than one argument and combine those arguments with and. I am not sure this was ever used. So it just made life harder for the compiler.

As of version 0.36, where() and having() accept only one parameter.