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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
feat(protocol): Support comparisons in rule conditions on strings #2721
feat(protocol): Support comparisons in rule conditions on strings #2721
Changes from 5 commits
6aedc4f
70df1d4
9bff636
761e366
636d382
b94bfe7
a910d4b
55912c3
cb7db8e
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.
Now since this is a value, should we also add array support like
Eq
has?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 didn't wanna add this since the semantics of a comparison with an array are questionable. For
eq
, we defined it as "one of", but for comparisons this seemed weird to me. Thoughts?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 personally found it already surprising for
Eq
, usually this would be aIn
operator. So for me then I assumed the value can always be an array and it turns into something likevalue <OPERATOR> ANY(value)
.I agree though this is weird but we already have a precedent for the array. Though I think we just leave it as is and implement it when we need it (we can bump versions now, yay)
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.
In some enums we've renamed the option to
deprecated
and set a serde alias on it. Could that be helpful here?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 like this
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.
It's a good idea, however it creates a difference between how Sentry serializes the schema and how it looks in Relay. I'm afraid that it causes more confusion when looking at the code.