feat: better select type #12598
Open
feat: better select type #12598
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What?
Add type support for return value when select is used. Instead of returning the
string | Relationin to-one relations and(string | Relation)[]not proper type is returned -RelationorRelation[]for cases when the relation is explicitly selected.NOTE1: string can be replaced with number, depends on the IDs you use in your app
NOTE2: Relation is a collection type
Why?
Because it is frustrating working with union types when you know that in runtime you will have this typing
How?
I have expanded
TransformDataWithSelecttype.Type checking is done using a type utils
Equalthat resolves totrueif types are same andfalseotherwise. We type a variable with this and assigntrueto a variable. If type resolves tofalseyou get an error.Should I add type checks in every test case?
Future works?
depth.