Merged
Conversation
dwwoelfel
commented
Mar 6, 2025
| [{:expected 'non-empty-list? | ||
| :in (conj (:in state) :or) | ||
| :message "The list of `or` conditions can't be empty."}])))} | ||
| (let [conds (->> v |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is still overly complicated--I think it would be a lot easier to reason about if we got rid of the spec coercion, but that's a bigger project.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oo, that could be interesting! Would make it nicer too when we print stuff deep inside the codebase
Contributor
|
View Vercel preview at instant-www-js-fix-lots-of-nested-ands-and-ors-jsv.vercel.app. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Ran into this bug while working on cel -> instaql, where we can generate lots of nested ORs.
Three fixes in this PR:
[{:or [{handle: 'dww'}]}]is the same as{handle: 'dww'})[{:or [{:or [cond-a, cond-b]}, cond-c]]}]generates{:or [cond-a, cond-b, cond-c]}instead of{:or [[cond-a, cond-b], cond-c]}.There is still a remaining issue where we could potentially include the same cte twice, leading to postgres complaints about ambiguous columns. I can't reproduce it without disabling the
orcollapsing, so I'm ignoring it for now. I think it might have something to do with how we generate join syms for the different groups of ors and ands. We might need to increment the level?