Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Introduce
sqlAll
,sqlAny
and related state types #112Introduce
sqlAll
,sqlAny
and related state types #112Changes from all commits
dfc7204
37f6fd9
2e27eb2
85c3c26
79de921
a5ad0ad
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What is it for? Apart from being used in
sqlWhereAny
. Tests?Because
sqlWhere . sqlAll
is redundant.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well for nesting
AND
s inOR
's and parity withsqlAny
. How else are you going to write(a OR (b AND c))
?I mean, you could use
sqlWhereAny
, but if you want to go withsqlWhere . sqlAny $ ...
, then at one point you have to usesqlWhere . sqlAll $ ...
inside.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, I see. The comment you added to the code makes it clear, thanks.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps we should deprecate
sqlWhereAny
and start usingsqlWhere . sqlAny $ do ...
instead?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Depends if you'd like to remove it eventually. But if you want to deprecate
sqlWhereAny
, then I'd like to deprecatesqlOR
,sqlConcatAND
andsqlConcatOR
as well.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If it comes to kontrakcja,
sqlOR
is used 1 time,sqlConcatAND
5 times andsqlConcatOR
4 times, so it seems feasible. Let's do it a separate PR though.