Code review comment for lp:~lifeless/storm/with

> I don't think we'd want the example you have of a full Person table defined on
> top of a WITH clause: unless it loaded into the storm cache in the same place
> our regular Person table does (which IIRC would raise errors?).

My point is that whether you find this useful right now or not, it will just work,
because it's just another way to define a table.

> @all
> I'm still at a loss on how to code this up - it sounds nice but I need
> pointers: I got as far as I did with this on blind luck following the path of
> least resistance. I'm not asking for the code to be written for me, but I need
> to know where existing similar tests are that I can copy; how the compiler
> works so I can tell how to change it - or at least some hints pointing me in
> the appropriate directions...

It's hard to help you with plain "I don't get it. What do I do?" questions
after we provide you some guidance. We need more specific questions from
you taking into account what we already said, otherwise we'll end up just
saying the same thing again.

We can also have a voice call at some point to have a more concrete
implementation conversation, if you're finding hard to understand the
guidance we're providing and would find better to chat over it.