Multi label recursive join

[andyfengHKU]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 99.10% and no project coverage change.

Comparison is base (8bbec69) 91.93% compared to head (c2f85e2) 91.93%.

❗ Current head c2f85e2 differs from pull request most recent head e9ea91b. Consider uploading reports for the commit e9ea91b to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           master    #1581    +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage   91.93%   91.93%            
========================================
  Files         703      704     +1     
  Lines       25545    25361   -184     
========================================
- Hits        23484    23316   -168     
+ Misses       2061     2045    -16     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/include/binder/binder.h	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/include/planner/join_order_enumerator.h	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/binder/bind/bind_graph_pattern.cpp	94.28% <88.23%> (+0.38%)	⬆️
...inder/bind_expression/bind_function_expression.cpp	96.24% <100.00%> (ø)
src/binder/visitor/property_collector.cpp	98.11% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
src/include/binder/expression/rel_expression.h	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/include/processor/operator/mask.h	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...de/processor/operator/recursive_extend/bfs_state.h	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ude/processor/operator/recursive_extend/frontier.h	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...processor/operator/recursive_extend/path_scanner.h	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 16 more

... and 29 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[ray6080]

One general comment is that we should clean up the use of struct and use class when necessary. e.g., BaseFrontierScanner, Frontier, etc.