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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
TS of esKuery\node_types #56857
TS of esKuery\node_types #56857
Changes from 2 commits
92a7645
cea676d
0f55c77
0b78487
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.
For each of the
toElasticsearchQuery()
items in this file, should thenode
param they are accepting match the returned value of thebuildNode()
function?For example here, I would expect the interface to be:
...and similar for each of the others as well as the individual node_types definitions themselves.
I don't know enough about the kuery implementation to say with 100% confidence that this should be the case, but it makes sense based on my understanding of the code and would make the typings in this PR much simpler
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 agree with you, but I was trying to stick with the API defined in
types.ts
as much as possible, to avoid errors.