Skip to content

Conversation

@dehru
Copy link
Contributor

@dehru dehru commented Feb 1, 2021

What does this PR do?

Updates main with the latest from develop branch

What issues does this PR fix or reference?

Continued LSP improvements
Custom Select Component in Soql Builder UI

dehru and others added 6 commits January 22, 2021 08:52
* add soql-statement to model
* verify that we include the soql statement in the model
* update the package version so we can publish and consume
* Initial support for Aggregate functions.

Also:
 * Fix: Propose "COUNT()" only if right after "SELECT"
 * Remove special-case for "SELECT (SELECT ), | FROM Foo". Not worth it

* Add completion inside function expression

Example: SELECT AVG(|) FROM

Also:
 * Improve ANTLR error recovery to better extract FROM expresssions

* Make completions inside function expression type-aware

* Add smarter completion on GROUP BY clause

Also:
 * Complete only with "groupable" fields.
 * Give priority to complete GROUP BY with fields which appear
   on SELECT and are not aggregated or groupped.
 * On ORDER BY: Complete only with "sortable" fields
 * Add completion on semi-join SELECTs (in WHERE clauses)
 * Fix defect when cursor is around multiple newlines
 * Improve query analysis impl
 * Pre-select "WHERE" option if provided

* Improve support for queries with semi-joins

* Refactor: move soql operator semantics to LSP server-side

* Add more code-completion proposals for literal values

Including:

* Range date literals (LAST_YEAR, YESTERDAY, LAST_N_DAYS:n, etc.)
* Simple templates for: int, double, string, currency

* Quiet completion on HAVING clause

* Add a space before opening parenthesis after INCLUDES/EXCLUDES
* Jhork/custom select fields (#111)
* Jhork/custom select from (#130)
* Jhork/custom select order by (#134)
* set the error overlay to be on top of all other form elements
* add z-index to .unsupported-syntax
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 1, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #152 (4ebe551) into main (bd25c20) will increase coverage by 0.29%.
The diff coverage is 92.52%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #152      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   88.25%   88.55%   +0.29%     
==========================================
  Files          47       48       +1     
  Lines        1575     1773     +198     
  Branches      366      418      +52     
==========================================
+ Hits         1390     1570     +180     
- Misses        183      201      +18     
  Partials        2        2              
Flag Coverage Δ
language-server 98.25% <ø> (ø)
soql-builder-ui 91.95% <92.52%> (-0.48%) ⬇️
soql-model 80.32% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
.../modules/querybuilder/customSelect/customSelect.ts 92.03% <92.03%> (ø)
...oql-builder-ui/src/modules/querybuilder/app/app.ts 86.73% <100.00%> (ø)
...ilder-ui/src/modules/querybuilder/fields/fields.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...l-builder-ui/src/modules/querybuilder/from/from.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...der-ui/src/modules/querybuilder/orderBy/orderBy.ts 89.47% <100.00%> (-10.53%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update bd25c20...4ebe551. Read the comment docs.

@dehru dehru changed the title Merge LSP Improvements / Custom Select Components into Main Merge Custom Select Components into Main Feb 2, 2021
Comment on lines 19 to +21
--soql-media-max-width: 480px;
--soql-label-width: 80px;
--soql-input-width: 400px;
--soql-label-container-width: 80px;
--soql-selection-container-width: 400px;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These properties are never used in the data view. I assume they are changed here for consistency with SOQL builder. But should they be removed instead?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You are correct, they are not used (yet?). I put them there sort of as documentation so we stay in sync with the builder if we do use them. Kind of like the unmodeledsyntax. I could go either way with these, it not that hard to add them back, I just didn't want anyone to forget we have global variables on the builder side.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am guessing there is a good chance I will be the one to do any work on the data view anyway, so we can remove them now if we feel that's better.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's leave them for now.

@jgellin-sf jgellin-sf self-requested a review February 2, 2021 15:48
@jgellin-sf jgellin-sf merged commit 093b1ac into main Feb 2, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants