You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Suppose I have a table nodes with attributes id, parent_id, and name.
It would but much more convenient for the paths to use names instead of ids, at least for my purposes.
Changing the fragment setting breaks most the libraries functionality, mostly due to assumptions on the relationship between fragment and parent_fragment
always returns nothing if the fragment setting is changed to name, since we would essentially be querying Node.where(id: "some_string") (and the final query would end up looking like WHERE id = 0 since "some_string".to_i will return 0)
I realize that supporting this would probably require a lot of changes, but I figured it would be worth getting people's thoughts on.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Suppose I have a table
nodes
with attributesid
,parent_id
, andname
.It would but much more convenient for the paths to use names instead of ids, at least for my purposes.
Changing the
fragment
setting breaks most the libraries functionality, mostly due to assumptions on the relationship betweenfragment
andparent_fragment
for example:
always returns nothing if the fragment setting is changed to
name
, since we would essentially be queryingNode.where(id: "some_string")
(and the final query would end up looking likeWHERE id = 0
since"some_string".to_i
will return 0)I realize that supporting this would probably require a lot of changes, but I figured it would be worth getting people's thoughts on.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: