refactor: removed get_test_accessor and renamed vars with meaningful txt

[akhilender-bongirwar]

Please be sure to look over the pull request guidelines here: https://github.com/spaceandtimelabs/sxt-proof-of-sql/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#submit-pr.

Please go through the following checklist

• The PR title and commit messages adhere to guidelines here: https://github.com/spaceandtimelabs/sxt-proof-of-sql/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md. In particular ! is used if and only if at least one breaking change has been introduced.
• I have run the ci check script with source scripts/run_ci_checks.sh.

Rationale for this change

fixes #236
/claim #236

This PR fixes Part 2 of issue #236

• Refactor or remove get_test_accessor so that it is explicit what the tables, columns, and data types are in the SchemaAccessor. For example, the above query has a t table with the columns i, i0, and i1, all with BigInt type. These columns should also be renamed to be slightly less generic and/or more helpful.

Part 1 and 3 are already fixed in PR #261

What changes are included in this PR?

• Removed the get_test_accessor function, replacing it with a schema-specific accessor.
• Renamed variables like i, i0, i1, and s to more meaningful names like salary, department, tax, and name reflecting the context of the data.

Are these changes tested?

These changes are in tests.

[akhilender-bongirwar]

@iajoiner @JayWhite2357 please review

[akhilender-bongirwar]

#284 (comment)

There are three tests:

1. count_aggregation_always_have_integer_type
2. group_by_expressions_are_parsed_before_an_order_by_referencing_an_aggregate_alias_result
3. we_can_use_multiple_group_by_clauses_with_multiple_agg_and_non_agg_exprs

As you can see in the workflow logs here, even though I made changes in this commit, the tests were failing.

After carefully reading through the workflow logs, I noticed that the left: QueryExpr and right: QueryExpr were actually equal, but I was still getting an assertion error: left == right failed. This was the case for all three tests.

So, I explicitly assigned previous given names to only these tests, and after that all the tests passed successfully.

[akhilender-bongirwar]

#284 (comment)

There are three tests:

1. `count_aggregation_always_have_integer_type`

2. `group_by_expressions_are_parsed_before_an_order_by_referencing_an_aggregate_alias_result`

3. `we_can_use_multiple_group_by_clauses_with_multiple_agg_and_non_agg_exprs`

As you can see in the workflow logs here, even though I made changes in this commit, the tests were failing.

After carefully reading through the workflow logs, I noticed that the left: QueryExpr and right: QueryExpr were actually equal, but I was still getting an assertion error: left == right failed. This was the case for all three tests.

So, I explicitly assigned previous given names to only these tests, and after that all the tests passed successfully.

Could you guide me on how to proceed here

[iajoiner]

That looks really weird. Let me take a look.

[iajoiner]

@akhilender-bongirwar I really doubt that's the case. Could you please fix these three tests and ping me if you get errors?

[akhilender-bongirwar]

@akhilender-bongirwar I really doubt that's the case. Could you please fix these three tests and ping me if you get errors?

Sure.

[akhilender-bongirwar]

In this latest commit, I just renamed the variables to make them slightly less generic, as you can see, but the tests are still failing.

@iajoiner PTAL

[iajoiner]

@akhilender-bongirwar Oh I see. In these situations ordering of certain columns might be dependent on their alphabetical ordering.

Since in all these cases you have very large print outs that are only slightly different you want to do is to feed left hand side and right hand side into ChatGPT and let it summarize differences for you. Then you should solve them.

[akhilender-bongirwar]

@iajoiner, I didn’t realize the order would cause the test to fail 😅. Passed all checks. Thanks so much for your help! 😊

[iajoiner]

@akhilender-bongirwar Thanks for your hard work and patience! :)

[akhilender-bongirwar]

@JayWhite2357 please review

[akhilender-bongirwar]

@JayWhite2357 could you please review

[github-actions]

🎉 This PR is included in version 0.34.2 🎉

The release is available on GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

[akhilender-bongirwar]

@iajoiner @JayWhite2357, I actually did not recieve the bounty till now. Could you look into it.