Håvard M. Ottestad

https://github.com/eclipse/rdf4j/pull/4103 Also a few fixes in https://github.com/eclipse/rdf4j/pull/4117

``` select distinct ?target_0000000000 ?value { ?target_0000000000 a . ?target_0000000000 ?value . BIND(("2018-01-01"^^ >= ?value) as ?9354941586934ef58838394e53eb08e7_0_) FILTER(COALESCE(?9354941586934ef58838394e53eb08e7_0_, true)) } ``` This doesn't return any result anymore.

Maybe we should stick with strict mode as the default?

I presume the purpose of this PR is to allow for strict/extended to be configured per transaction. We don't really have to make any changes to the defaults now, do...

Marked this as stale to signal that the PR hasn't been active for a while and that we should consider closing it.

Could you share the query that caused this for you?

I checked if maybe we were dropping the binding when creating the ArrayBindingSet, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Any chance you can create a small dataset that...

I've made a test based on your query and data, but I'm not able to get a binding `quantityKind` on the main branch or on the develop branch. Could you...

> Issue still exists with GraphDB 10.0.0 (RDF4J 4.0,2). Tested after MR #4039 Could you help me out with some code so I can try to reproduce this? I'm on...

I split it out from a bigger branch I have with a bunch of various optimizations. I remember you were talking about index based binding sets, which would probably make...