Skip to content
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

[⏳] Enhanced auto typed schema. #12122

Conversation

mohammad0-0ahmad
Copy link
Contributor

@mohammad0-0ahmad mohammad0-0ahmad commented Jul 19, 2022

@mohammad0-0ahmad mohammad0-0ahmad force-pushed the schema-options-coverage-auto-typed-schema branch from c1155d8 to 20a9073 Compare July 19, 2022 04:29
@mohammad0-0ahmad mohammad0-0ahmad marked this pull request as draft July 19, 2022 04:37
@mohammad0-0ahmad mohammad0-0ahmad changed the title [:hourglass_flowing_sand:] Enhanced auto typed schema. [⏳] Enhanced auto typed schema. Jul 19, 2022
@mohammad0-0ahmad mohammad0-0ahmad force-pushed the schema-options-coverage-auto-typed-schema branch 3 times, most recently from b728108 to b5fccf6 Compare July 21, 2022 11:31
@@ -599,20 +600,6 @@ function gh11997() {
userSchema.index({ name: 1 }, { weights: { name: 1 } });
}

function gh12003() {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This test is incorrect, Auto typed schema will not work if typeKey has been changed in this way, because it will be "type" and will not reflect the correct type of the actual value.
@Uzlopak @vkarpov15 do you have any thoughts?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think we can support this approach to supply schema options with auto typed schema.
It will work just if the end user use "const" assertion and not use predefined type, then the type will reflect the actual value.

mohammad0-0ahmad referenced this pull request in mohammad0-0ahmad-forks/mongoose Jul 28, 2022
@mohammad0-0ahmad mohammad0-0ahmad force-pushed the schema-options-coverage-auto-typed-schema branch 2 times, most recently from 70c6dc5 to 2aa4a62 Compare August 1, 2022 20:09
Bumps [eslint](https://github.com/eslint/eslint) from 8.19.0 to 8.21.0.
- [Release notes](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/releases)
- [Changelog](https://github.com/eslint/eslint/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md)
- [Commits](eslint/eslint@v8.19.0...v8.21.0)

---
updated-dependencies:
- dependency-name: eslint
  dependency-type: direct:development
  update-type: version-update:semver-minor
...

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
@mohammad0-0ahmad mohammad0-0ahmad force-pushed the schema-options-coverage-auto-typed-schema branch from 2aa4a62 to 1397189 Compare August 3, 2022 06:46
@mohammad0-0ahmad mohammad0-0ahmad force-pushed the schema-options-coverage-auto-typed-schema branch 6 times, most recently from 611e66e to 120665e Compare August 6, 2022 23:33
ts-benchmark added 6 commits August 7, 2022 01:48
 Author:    Mohammad Ahmad <kurtular.vadisi@gmail.com>
 Author:    Mohammad Ahmad <kurtular.vadisi@gmail.com>
Author:    Mohammad Ahmad <kurtular.vadisi@gmail.com>
 Author:    Mohammad Ahmad <kurtular.vadisi@gmail.com>
 Author:    Mohammad Ahmad <kurtular.vadisi@gmail.com>
 Author:    Mohammad Ahmad <kurtular.vadisi@gmail.com>
@mohammad0-0ahmad mohammad0-0ahmad force-pushed the schema-options-coverage-auto-typed-schema branch from 120665e to 937a491 Compare August 6, 2022 23:51
@hasezoey
Copy link
Collaborator

hasezoey commented Jan 7, 2023

@mohammad0-0ahmad is this PR still planned on being updated? because it looks rather stale to me - if this should not get a update within ~30 days, i would close it as "stale"

@mohammad0-0ahmad
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mohammad0-0ahmad is this PR still planned on being updated? because it looks rather stale to me - if this should not get a update within ~30 days, i would close it as "stale"

Hello @hasezoey !

Sorry for being inactive for a while.
I don't think as well that I will have time to continue with this one during the next month.
You can close it right now and when I have time to continue with it, then we can reopen it.
@vkarpov15 @Uzlopak might can check this PR and maybe complete it if they have time for that and if it something good to have soon.

Best regards everyone :)

@vkarpov15
Copy link
Collaborator

We're going to close this PR for now. We implemented part of this PR in #12731, but ran into some issues like #12871. Given those issues, we want to sort out getting this working for just timestamps option before expanding to other similar tasks. We need to be very cautious with big TypeScript changes, because there's always some obscure issue that pops up.

@vkarpov15 vkarpov15 closed this Jan 14, 2023
@francescov1
Copy link
Contributor

@vkarpov15 Was there any progress made on #11787? Or any relevant findings? I tried tackling this about 6 months ago but didn't have any luck, would like to give it another shot

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

10 participants