This PR auto-assign ids for anonymous variables straight into parser.
Otherwise - it's pretty easy to mess up with traversal order in the core
code and assign ids incorrectly.
For example, before the fix, following code worked incorrectly because
parameter values were assigned first to conflict clause instead of
values:
```rs
let mut stmt = conn.prepare("INSERT INTO test VALUES (?, ?), (?, ?) ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE SET v = ?")?;
stmt.bind_at(1.try_into()?, Value::Integer(1));
stmt.bind_at(2.try_into()?, Value::Integer(20));
stmt.bind_at(3.try_into()?, Value::Integer(3));
stmt.bind_at(4.try_into()?, Value::Integer(40));
stmt.bind_at(5.try_into()?, Value::Integer(66));
```
Closes#3455
- even if index search will return only 1 row - it will call next in the loop - and we incorrecty can process same row values multiple times
- the following query failed with this optimization:
turso> CREATE TABLE t (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT, k TEXT, c0 INT);
turso> CREATE UNIQUE INDEX idx_p1_0 ON t(c0);
turso> insert into t values (null, 'uu', -1);
turso> insert into t values (null, 'uu', -2);
turso> UPDATE t SET c0 = NULL WHERE c0 = -1;
turso> SELECT * FROM t
┌────┬────┬────┐
│ id │ k │ c0 │
├────┼────┼────┤
│ 1 │ uu │ │
├────┼────┼────┤
│ 2 │ uu │ │
└────┴────┴────┘
closes#3285
maybe adding seperate func for it is stupid but i kept running into
issues with not closing some random `}` and it got annoying real quick
so i just moved tht into its own func. - and as i am using same logic in
3 places i think it's ok.
Closes#3412
We caught a pretty bad bug quite late because this fuzz test only
ran on btree changes - let's run it on every CI run but with less
iterations than before.
Addition of compatibilty tests for `printf()`.
While doing this I found some differences in the current implementation,
so this fixes those too.
Closes#3438
SQLite supports complex expressions in group by columns - because of
course it does...
So we need to make sure that a column is created for this expression if
it doesn't exist already, and compute it, the same way we compute pre-
projections in the filter operator.
Fixes#3363Fixes#3366Fixes#3365Closes#3429
