Adds Input Field Types mergeable validation rule #45
Conversation
This file contains 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
glen-84
suggested changes
Aug 6, 2024
spec/Section 4 -- Composition.md
Outdated
| } | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| Fields are also consodered mergable if they have different nullability defined |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| Fields are also consodered mergable if they have different nullability defined | |
| Fields are also considered mergeable if they have different nullability defined. |
spec/Section 4 -- Composition.md
Outdated
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| Fields are also consodered mergable if they have different nullability defined | ||
| across Here, the field `tags` in `Input1` is a list type with compatible inner |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| across Here, the field `tags` in `Input1` is a list type with compatible inner | |
| Here, the field `tags` in `Input1` is a list type with compatible inner |
spec/Section 4 -- Composition.md
Outdated
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| In this counter-example, the field `field` in `Input1` has incompatible types | ||
| (`String` and `DateTime`), making them not mergeable: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| (`String` and `DateTime`), making them not mergeable: | |
| (`String` and `DateTime`), making them non-mergeable: |
Co-authored-by: Glen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Glen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Glen <[email protected]>
glen-84
reviewed
Aug 8, 2024
Comment on lines
+80
to
+81
| In this example, the field `field` on `Input1` is not mergable as the field has | ||
| different named types across (`String` and `DateTime`) source schemas: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| In this example, the field `field` on `Input1` is not mergable as the field has | |
| different named types across (`String` and `DateTime`) source schemas: | |
| In this example, the field `field` on `Input1` is not mergeable as the field has | |
| different named types (`String` and `DateTime`) across source schemas: |
|
We need to explain how the nullability merges ... |
michaelstaib
commented
Aug 8, 2024
| - Given each pair of members {fieldA} and {fieldB} in {fields}: | ||
| - Let {typeA} be the type of {fieldA}. | ||
| - Let {typeB} be the type of {fieldB}. | ||
| - {SameTypeShape(typeA, typeB)} must be true. |
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.
No description provided.