fix: do not treat concat as preserving lexicographical ordering

[buraksenn]

Which issue does this PR close?

• Closes concat should NOT be reported as preserve lex ordering - wrong output #23793.

Rationale for this change

Please check the issue details but main idea is concat does not guarantee lexicographical ordering

What changes are included in this PR?

Main change is simply deleting preserves_lex_ordering method from concat and let it fallback to default false. Also added relevant tests and adjusted comments

Are these changes tested?

Yes adjusted existing and added new tests

Are there any user-facing changes?

No api changes but there is a behavior change I think on optimization part for concat

[neilconway]

Thanks for this fix; overall looks reasonable to me.

As far as I can tell, there are no longer any expressions for which preserves_lex_ordering will return true. Do we think this API is still useful? Can we come up with any use-cases where either

1. we might add support for it in the future, or
2. where extensions would want support for it?

If we can't, we might consider deprecating and removing it.

If we keep it, I'm a bit nervous doing so with no actual implementations / test coverage in-tree...

[buraksenn]

Thanks for this fix; overall looks reasonable to me.

As far as I can tell, there are no longer any expressions for which preserves_lex_ordering will return true. Do we think this API is still useful? Can we come up with any use-cases where either

1. we might add support for it in the future, or
2. where extensions would want support for it?

If we can't, we might consider deprecating and removing it.

If we keep it, I'm a bit nervous doing so with no actual implementations / test coverage in-tree...

I thought maybe a downstream would depend on it so did not think of removing it but I understand it can be deprecated if its not usable. I'll check other comments thanks for the review

[neilconway]

lgtm, thanks!

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 80.71%. Comparing base (c118002) to head (24c8360).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #23804      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   80.72%   80.71%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1089     1089              
  Lines      368911   368869      -42     
  Branches   368911   368869      -42     
==========================================
- Hits       297785   297716      -69     
- Misses      53374    53398      +24     
- Partials    17752    17755       +3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.