-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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
Field keystone to non dynmic for casting #10
Conversation
- missing coverage on nil comparision, I'm going to need to change the tests to a different schema to get full converage.
seems like a reasonable approach I think I don't have strong feelings about a refactor now. The tuple is a bit messy but it's still readable imo. |
See #11 for some details as we updated the implementation |
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.
Nice. Seems like a good approach to allow the old behavior where we use a field/2
to explicitly list the column when possible and use the fragment/dynamic approach when a field/2
just won't cut it.
Also the wording around "route_" sgtm 👍
|> Enum.map(fn {{date, count}, index} -> | ||
%{id: index, date: date, count: count} | ||
end) | ||
records = c.schema.seed() |
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.
I like 👍
Basic approach, revert to the previous field lookups for realized fields in comparisons. Only use the dynamic value lookup when utilizing a fragment.
TODOTADONEfield_or_alias
tofield_or_dynamic
, thoughts?either
type to be more readable and maintainable. Do I refactor those calls now?After some review and thought, the todo approach changed slightly.
maybe_expression
instead offield_or_dynamic
, and split the calls in fob by the two distinct branches of field and expression.