Allow == for Option[T] and/or T columns #1437
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
deusaquilus
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Doing
a.exists(av => b.exists(bv => a ==b))everywhere is really, really annoying. We disallowed doing==when one side was optional because we were concerned that databases would treat them differently but after the learnings of #1053 and #1295 I am significantly more confident that we are doing the right thing across different kinds of databases. Many databases in the BI world have nearly every column being nullable. It is time to improve the developer ergonomics in this matter.README.mdif applicable[WIP]to the pull request title if it's work in progresssbt scalariformFormat test:scalariformFormatto make sure that the source files are formatted@getquill/maintainers