HCL Domino Ideas Portal

Welcome to the #dominoforever Product Ideas Forum! The place where you can submit product ideas and enhancement request. We encourage you to participate by voting on, commenting on, and creating new ideas. All new ideas will be evaluated by HCL Product Management & Engineering teams, and the next steps will be communicated. While not all submitted ideas will be executed upon, community feedback will play a key role in influencing which ideas are and when they will be implemented.

For more information and upcoming events around #dominoforever, please visit our Destination Domino Page

Add a new idea Subscribe
Status Under Consideration
Workspace Domino Designer
Created by Guest
Created on Aug 8, 2019

RELATED IDEAS

Better syntax for Domino Query Language

Doing some tests with Domino Query Language at the moment. The language syntax is far from intuitive sometimes. Some examples:
form = 'MProcessus' and (Active = 'TRUE' or Version = 0)
is a correct query and delivers,
 
Similar queries do not work, because there seem to be syntactical errors:
  • form = 'MProcessus' and (Active = 'TRUE' or Version=0)
    does not have spaces around the equals-sign
  • form = 'MProcessus' and (Active = 'TRUE')
    has parentheses around a single boolean expression and is refused
  • form = 'MProcessus' and (not Active = 'TRUE' or Version = 0)
    complains about matching parens*

Would it be possible to use a more standard language with a syntax that everybody understands? Where spaces are optional, parentheses are accepted and where the not operator is a unary operator?

 
 
  • Attach files
  • Guest
    Reply
    |     Jan 20, 2020

    I can no longer enter comments in aha.

    Anyway, this has been suggested before. Comments inline this style below

  • Guest
    Reply
    |     Aug 9, 2019

    Other pet peeves: no single character operators (like &, | and !), only single quotes are allowed for strings, no CR allowed instead of space (for multi-line queries), "... in all(..." fails whereas "... in all (..." seems correct...

    More to follow? IMHO both the lexical analyser (then tokeniser) and the parser are sub-standard.

Copyright © 2023 HCL Technologies Limited