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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
[Search v2] [App] Use new query syntax #45617
[Search v2] [App] Use new query syntax #45617
Changes from 6 commits
25acc96
fe0ec54
6f9ba6d
0a8edf0
9eceb03
1c7e908
0987879
a4d185a
ddd1b91
fb83ab1
ab849e0
c7af40c
f758cc4
84ee1f9
4741f7a
1fc7be1
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.
I think we need to include the
policyID
in thequery
as well so that the AST includes it in the filters. Any reason to treat it differently?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 think this is a transitional step.
BTW will current grammar handle
policyID
? I don't see this keyword in the.peggy
fileThere 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.
Ah makes sense that we do it like this for now. We should eventually move it to the AST and include it in the peggy grammar too
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.
Do we need a separate issue to migrate the
policyID
param to the AST?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.
Do you think it should be in the root of
QueryJSON
? So something likeAlso currently it is called policyIDs, as the assumption was that we wanted to be able to use multiple policyIDs in the future. Is this still the case?
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.
We'll add it to filters as
policyID
. So the AST will look like this:I think we should use
policyID
singular from now on since we have a bunch of other filters, e.g.category
,tag
, etc that accepts multiple values but are all singular too.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 hope I understand this correctly. I will add
policyID
to grammar and keep it inside AST, while removing it from URLThere 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.
read my comment here: #45617 (comment)