why does limit(0) omit LIMIT from the final query?

[camhashemi]

source code

this means that providing limit(0) is equivalent to not calling limit at all, which is odd behavior imho.

At least for MySQL, limit 0 doesn't behave this way.

[bastman]

I agree with @camhashemi .

I find silently ignoring the "limit" clause weird, if limit is set to a value <1.
I'd favour - to let the underlying db handle this case (e.g. fail).

Currently passing invalid arguments (limit <1) will silently expose all db rows.
This may lead to hard to spot bugs.
I'd prefer the fail-fast / in-your-face approach.

imho, limit=null would reflect the intention to get all rows without any limit.

What do you think?

[camhashemi]

especially with the query builder style, the less custom interpretation between DSL and SQL the better.

passing null is one way to signal "no limit", the other way would be to omit the call to limit at all.

[xirc]

I also agree with @camhashemi @bastman .

I found the behavior when I have written some test cases for my app.
The behavior is not good imho, even if I should write tests.

Here is a sample project.
https://github.com/xirc/exposed-limit-example

[Tapac]

Fixed. Will be available in 0.24.2