Refactor join type #577
Merged
Refactor join type #577
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
|
I like this change. Can we perhaps also do the same for |
|
Doesn't this break inference in some cases? I think that's not technically considered a breaking change but if users can notice it, it'd be nice to get a heads up in release notes or the docs. |
|
@killercup I'm afraid it can break inference, yes. These APIs are still unstable and it's not really a breaking change, so I think we're okay. It would be nice to add a heads up to the changelog, though. |
This pull request was closed.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I think the
future :: jointype constraint is strong.How about making it possible to
joindifferent future types?