Reshape initial tests
[dbsrgits/DBIx-Class.git] / BRANCH
CommitLineData
92b6fb5f 1mo: ribasushi: are you pro or con wrt the extended join conditions?
2[18:22] ribasushi: totally pro, but con scalarrefs
3[18:22] ribasushi: and I'm a horrible designer
4[18:23] ribasushi: so I say "tell me what to write and I'll write it better than you would"
5[18:23] mo: and what about a second hashref which is parsed like search()?
6[18:24] ribasushi: mo: show me what you mean
7[18:25] mst: join => { 'foo' => { -attrs => { ... } }
8[18:25] mo: has_many(accessor => 'CLASS', { foreign,self stuff }, { 'me.foo' => { '>' => 'accessor.bla' } }
9[18:26] mst: and -attrs can then override the rel's defaults
10[18:26] ash: mo: there's already a 4th arg to rels
11[18:26] mo: mst: where would you put that in the has_many call?
12[18:26] mst: mo: that's for search() syntax
13[18:26] mo: ok so add another method next to has_many
14[18:26] mst: no
15[18:27] mst: I'm talking about overriding the join stuff in search()
16[18:27] mo: I'm talking about extended join conditions
17[18:27] mst: I am aware of that. I'm saying "we should do this at the same time"
18[18:27] pktm hat den Chatroom betreten.
19[18:28] ribasushi: I'm talking about both - it should be just like attrs - specifiable both on relationship and on searches
20[18:28] mo: mst: what would you propose?
21[18:28] ribasushi: and overridable accordingly of course
22[18:28] mo: syntax I mean
23[18:28] mst: does SQL::Abstract have a { -ident => 'foo.bar' } yet?
24[18:29] ribasushi: explain?
25[18:29] pktm: How do I (efficently) select the complement of a relation? I have products and categories, and I want to know the products, that are not assigned to a specific category. So what is complement( $category->products() )?
26[18:29] mst: pktm: er
27[18:29] mst: pktm: you mean not assigned to category X
28[18:29] mst: pktm: or not assigned to -any- category ?
29[18:29] pktm: not assigned to category X
30[18:29] robkinyon: mst: I think I have a solution
31[18:30] robkinyon: it's completely backwards INcompatible
32[18:30] robkinyon:
33[18:30] ribasushi: robkinyon: not interested
34[18:30] robkinyon: but it solves all problems
35[18:30] robkinyon: (including world peace)
36[18:30] mo: ribasushi++ # who cares about backwards compat
37[18:31] robkinyon: why don't we just allow the full search() syntax?
38[18:31] ribasushi: mo: I don't give a fuck frankly, I just want *my* code to work
39[18:31] robkinyon: it's being used to build a search() anyways
40[18:31] arcanez: mst++ # being done
41[18:31] mst: robkinyon: that would be -exactly- my plan
42[18:31] mo: robkinyon++
43[18:31] mst: we add an extra relationship attribute
44[18:31] mo: what about self and foreign?
45[18:31] mst: that's a subref
46[18:31] mst: that's supplied @_ of ($rs, $lhs_alias, $rhs_alias)
47[18:32] mst: and is expected to return a chunk of search() params
48[18:32] dhoss: arcanez: get your GSoC stuff figured out yet?
49[18:32] robkinyon: and we implement the current code in terms of that?
50[18:32] ribasushi: mst: *this* I love
51[18:33] robkinyon: i can get behind this
52[18:33] robkinyon: regardless of use-case need
53[18:33] robkinyon: because this is a sane API
54[18:33] mst: it eliminates the "deep finding of self/foreign in SQLA" problem
55[18:33] mst: which was why I didn't want to do it before
56[18:33] zamolxes hat den Chatroom verlassen. (Quit: leaving)
57[18:33] mst: if the user wants to be clever, they get to handle that themselves
58[18:33] robkinyon: it also eliminates the need for two SQL specification languages
59[18:33] ribasushi: add_relationship receives two modes - either foreign./self. (for backcompat) or a regular search
60[18:33] robkinyon: and standardizes on the one that we're actually working on
61[18:33] ribasushi: and the helpers get adjusted to produce new code
62[18:33] ribasushi: and then join_cond can override all that
63[18:34] ribasushi: mst: that's what you mean?
64[18:34] mst: sub { my ($rs, $self, $foreign) = @_; { "${self}.foo" => { '>', "${foreign}.bar" } }; }
65[18:34] nigel hat den Chatroom verlassen. (Quit: nigel)
66[18:34] mst: add_relationship can DWIm based on if it gets a hashref or a subref in the join position
67[18:34] robkinyon: what about \{ ... } ?
68[18:34] mst: robkinyon: stop. think.
69[18:34] robkinyon: if it receives HREFREF, then it's just a search() args?
70[18:34] mo: what about an object
71[18:35] robkinyon: and that maps closely in terms of how things work right now to pass through
72[18:35] mst: wtf
73[18:35] mst: no.
74[18:36] mst: we can't just provide raw search args
75[18:36] mst: otherwise we have to recurse the full SQLA tree to substitute aliases
76[18:36] mst: which is a horrible job
77[18:36] mst: part of the reason for SQLA2 is to have somewhere we can do non horrible AQT comprehensions
78[18:36] mst: hence: subref
79[18:36] ribasushi: hear hear
80[18:36] mst: which delegates the problem to the user
81[18:36] arcanez: dhoss: plan to work on it once I watch a rather subdued mst
82[18:36] robkinyon: ok
83[18:37] dhoss: subdued mst? that's not fun...
84[18:37] robkinyon: subref it is
85[18:37] mst: we don't need to modify the helpers though
86[18:37] mst: well
87[18:37] arcanez: his dbix::class talk, wasn't it at 8am?
88[18:37] mst: resolve_join should switch to generating basic SQLA
89[18:37] mst: the only reason it ever didn't
90[18:37] mst: was SQLA had no way to represent identifiers on the RHS
91[18:37] mst: and the subref should just return SQLA
92[18:38] fade hat den Chatroom verlassen. (Quit: Leaving.)
93[18:38] ribasushi: these are implementation details which do not matter much
94[18:39] ribasushi: sqla does not support FROM at all, it is all done in Hacks anyway
95[18:39] ribasushi: talking about 1.5 of course
96[18:39] robkinyon: so, we agreed on a design?
97[18:40] solar_ant hat den Chatroom betreten.
98[18:40] mst: robkinyon: right, but this cleanup
99[18:40] mst: ribasushi:
100[18:40] mst: moves us towards being able to move it to SQLA
101[18:40] Psyche^ hat den Chatroom betreten.
102[18:40] mst: we didn't yet becaue ldami pointed out, quite rightly, that the DBIC interface was inconsistent
103[18:40] mst: we're about to fix that
104[18:40] Patterner hat den Chatroom verlassen. (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
105[18:40] Psyche^ heißt jetzt Patterner.
106[18:40] ribasushi: mst: of course, I do try to isolate chunks as I go
107[18:41] robkinyon: which means that ash and i better beat up SQLA2 quickly
108[18:41] ribasushi: but anyway - can someone type up an actual example for me
109[18:41] ribasushi: one for add_relationship
110[18:41] ribasushi: and one for search()
111[18:41] ribasushi: something I can turn into a test (or if someone submits an is_same_sql test - that'd be golden)
112[18:41] robkinyon: search() doesn't change here, does it?
113[18:41] ribasushi: sigh
114[18:42] ribasushi: of course it does - there's no point to do it otherwise
115[18:42] robkinyon: i thought the point was to unfuck add_relationship()?
116[18:42] ribasushi: i.e. not "changes" but supports an extra attribute
117[18:42] robkinyon: no ....
118[18:42] robkinyon: mst?
119[18:42] purl: i guess mst is wrong it is a hard way to write handles => qr/.*/ or a young whippersnapper from nigel's exalted position or planning to port the world to moose or working on serializable meta with another approach or simply a wanker or a bot or really a peach or a blunt or faster than light or a bitter betty or ~13 times better than sex
120[18:42] ribasushi: robkinyon: how do you supply bind values to a join if you set it on the relationship in stone
121[18:43] robkinyon: Scalar::Alias?
122[18:44] robkinyon: Scalar::Defer
123[18:44] purl: i heard Scalar::Defer was one of them, is a nice module, does nice stuff
124[18:44] ribasushi: robkinyon: Rainbow::Pony ?
125[18:44] ribasushi: be practical
126[18:44] arcanez: "are we fucked" "no because we didn't get to the pub in time to pull"
127[18:44] arcanez: hahahahaha
128[18:44] purl: LOLCON 5 reached.
129[18:44] robkinyon: ribasushi: Scalar::Defer is practical
130[18:45] robkinyon: at least mst has thought so in the past
131[18:45] mst: I like Data::Thunk better but nothingmuch is convinced it can't be 100% fixed and won't explain why well enough for me to try and prove him wrong
132[18:45] robkinyon: ribasushi: the point is that we want to defer resolution of the bindvars
133[18:46] mst: that's easy
134[18:46] robkinyon: that way, it becomes purely an add_relationship problem
135[18:46] mst: no rob, it doesn't
136[18:46] robkinyon: and search() is unaffected
137[18:46] mst: searhch needs extending as well
138[18:46] robkinyon: to do what?
139[18:46] mst: { join => { 'foo' => { -attrs => { join_args => [ 3 ] } } }
140[18:47] arcanez: mst: who's writing HashMap for moose?
141[18:47] ribasushi: mst: how about overrides on the spot? or that's too much foo?
142[18:47] ribasushi: I mean search to override the entire relship construction, only self. foreign. remain static
143[18:48] robkinyon: either way, have fun
144[18:48] • robkinyon & # errands
145[18:48] ribasushi: or hell - join without a relationship altogether
146[18:48] ribasushi: as in the case of self-join to figure out "last row"
147[18:48] mst: has_many('foo', $f_class, sub { my ($rs, $self, $foreign, $arg) = @_; { "${self}.id" => "${foreign}.bar_id", "${foreign}.weight" => { '>', $arg } }, ...);
148[18:48] mst: so you get
149[18:48] ribasushi: mst: I get that part
150[18:48] mst: LEFT JOIN foo ON me.id = foo.bar_id AND foo.weight > 3
151[18:49] ribasushi: I'm saying how do you feel about search ({}, { join => { a definition that is not a relationship, but which will produce a join nevertheless } });
152[18:50] ribasushi: example here: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/pipermail/dbix-class/2009-June/008095.html
153[18:50] ribasushi: I don't need anything from the right side, I just need the join to limit the left side properly
154[18:51] mst: anonymous joins will discourage re-use and completely fuck us introspection wise
155[18:51] mst: I don't want to do that yet
156[18:51] mst: we -will-
157[18:51] ribasushi: fair enough
158[18:51] mst: but I don't want to add too much stuff at once
159[18:51] ribasushi: mst++ #conservatism
160[18:53] mst: mo: so, you up for writing tests for this?
161[18:54] mo: I think David Ihnen is up to it, I was just trying to bring this to _your_ attention
162[18:54] ribasushi: except david ihnen is not reading this
163[18:55] mo: so you have to convince him by mail
164[18:55] mst: mo: so write up the conversation to an outline
165[18:55] mst: and reply to the list saying "if somebody writes spec tests we can make it happen"
166[18:55] mst: you don't have to be me to shout well volunteered
167[18:55] mst: you just have to look them in the eye and have them believe you already know they'll say yes
168[18:56] mo: I didn't get that add_relationship part
169[18:56] mo: does it even matter?
170[18:56] mst: yes
171[18:57] mst: without the add_relationship part none of this will work at all
172[18:57] mo: but is it required for the tests?
173[18:57] mst: yes
174[18:57] mst: how can you write tests for something that can't work?
175[18:57] mo: so I have to call add_relationship in my test?
176[18:57] mst: what?
177[18:57] mst: what the fuck are you talking about?
178[18:57] mo: has_many calls add_relationship right?
179[18:57] mst: this is the DBIC test suite
180[18:57] mst: it's got a fucktonne of rels
181[18:57] mst: just add another one
182[18:58] pktm hat den Chatroom verlassen.
183[18:58] mo: can you tell me your weight so I can add it to the actors result class?
184[18:58] pktm hat den Chatroom betreten.
185[18:58] mst: I haven't weighed myself in ten years
186[18:59] pktm hat den Chatroom verlassen.
187[18:59] dnm: mst weight is made up of 90% human, 10% pure unadulterated rage.
188[18:59] • ilmari guesses about 75kg
189[18:59] dnm: s/mst/mst's/
190[18:59] dhoss: mo i'm 165, kthx
191[18:59] mst: I'm probably 14 stone ish? maybe a bit less
192[18:59] ilmari: judging by the fact that he's slightly taller and slightly skinnier than me
193[18:59] mst: I dunno
194[18:59] dhoss: dnm: you forget the beer part
195[19:00] ilmari: convert 75 kg to stone
196[19:00] purl: 75 kg is 11.8105 stone.
197[19:00] mst: hmm. I was 12 stone ish many years back
198[19:00] mo: convert 14 stine to kg
199[19:00] purl: I don't know how to convert 14 stine to kg.
200[19:00] dhoss: purl: convert 11.8105 stone to pounds
201[19:00] purl: 11.8105 stone is 165.347 pounds.
202[19:00] ribasushi: dhoss: he does evacuate occasionally...?
203[19:00] mst: I think you're ignoring the beer gut.
204[19:00] mo: convert 14 stone to kg
205[19:00] purl: 14 stone is 88.9041 kg.
206[19:00] • ilmari is somewhere between 75-80kg
207[19:00] dhoss: ribasushi: i figured it couldn't hurt to average
208[19:00] ribasushi: convert 82kg to stone
209[19:00] purl: 82kg is 12.9128 stone.
210[19:00] ribasushi: convert 82kg to lb
211[19:00] purl: 82kg is 180.779 lb.
212[19:00] • ribasushi 's a fatass
213[19:01] dhoss: mst: you're what, 6'2"
214[19:01] mo: convert 6'" to meters
215[19:01] purl: I don't know how to convert 6'" to meters.
216[19:01] dhoss: ribasushi: how tall?
217[19:01] mst: huh
218[19:01] mst: 71kg
219[19:01] mo: convert 6'2" to meters
220[19:01] purl: I don't know how to convert 6'2" to meters.
221[19:01] ilmari: purl: convert 6ft+2in to m
222[19:01] purl: Syntax error
223[19:01] ilmari: purl: convert 6.333ft to m
224[19:01] purl: 6.333ft is 1.9303 m.
225[19:01] mst: and I'm 6'
226[19:01] ribasushi: dhoss: 194cm, but I'm rather skinny, was at 75 up until 2yrs ago
227[19:01] mst: if my back was straight I'd be taller
228[19:01] ilmari: purl: convert 6.16ft to m
229[19:01] purl: 6.16ft is 1.87757 m.
230[19:02] mst: but I've spent too long slouching so my spine is curved
231[19:02] ribasushi: now I am still mostly skinny
232[19:02] dhoss: purl: convert 194cm to feet
233[19:02] purl: 194cm is 6.36483 feet.
234[19:02] dhoss: ribasushi: tall guy
235[19:02] • dhoss is short apparently
236[19:02] ribasushi: well if we're factoring spine curvature
237[19:02] ribasushi: I'm normally 191-2
238[19:03] mst: I literally can't stand up straighter than that
239[19:03] dhoss: ribasushi: still, i'm only 5'10"
240[19:03] mo: ok guys please fill out that form with your weight and size so I can include it with the dbic test suite and do an extended relationship on it: http://etherpad.com/jeAQjdub7M
241[19:03] arcanez: I'm 6'1", 190lbs
242[19:03] mst: mo: why not just use the year field on cds?
243[19:03] mo: it's more fun this way
244[19:03] dnm: I'm 6'0", a lot lbs.
245[19:04] dhoss: huh. i haven't felt this short since middle school haha.
246[19:04] arcanez: so yeah, don't bother trying to understand http://www.shadowcat.co.uk/archive/conference-video/yapc-na-2009/lightning/
247[19:04] dnm: But, I am 15lbs lighter than I was 1 month ago.
248[19:04] arcanez: oh, he apologizes at the beginning
249[19:04] • dhoss actually gained 10lbs
250[19:05] arcanez: dhoss: p90x?
251[19:05] ribasushi: that pad thingy is nifty
252[19:05] dhoss: arcanez: no, before that, i'm not sure what caused it
253[19:06] mo: wtf is using chrome?
254[19:06] • arcanez raises hand
255[19:07] mst: I'm waiting for them to learn how to write desktop code
256[19:07] arcanez: convert 190 pounds to stone
257[19:07] purl: 190 pounds is 13.5714 stone.
258[19:07] arcanez: convert 190 pounds to kg
259[19:07] purl: 190 pounds is 86.1826 kg.
260[19:08] mo: we should start coding in that editor
261[19:08] arcanez: convert 6.1 ft to m
262[19:08] purl: 6.1 ft is 1.85928 m.
263[19:08] frew: ribasushi: ok, I've reviewed most of this. I'll read through the rest tomorrow and then commence testing
264[19:08] ribasushi: frew++
265[19:09] frew: in other news: Firefox 3.5!
266[19:09] • ilmari has been using it happily on karmic since beta4, waiting for jaunty backport
267[19:10] arcanez: ilmari: jaunty uses amarok2 huh
268[19:10] frew: amarok2--
269[19:10] arcanez: frew: there aren't enough -- for that
270[19:10] frew: amarok2-- for (1..10**10);
271[19:10] ilmari: arcanez: I don't use amarok
272[19:10] arcanez:
273[19:10] frew: ok maybe that's a little harsh
274[19:10] ilmari: jaunty has amarok 2.1
275[19:10] frew: I really like amarok
276[19:11] ilmari: s/jaunty/karmic/
277[19:11] frew: and 2 is good; but it's got bugs that make me cry
278[19:11] ilmari: kde4.2 is annoying
279[19:11] arcanez: I <3 amarok1
280[19:11] ilmari: less so after I switched off compositing, which is just buggy beyond belief
281[19:11] ribasushi: frew: don/t forget t/42toplimit.t - it needs a massive rewrite to set the new query syntax in stone
282[19:11] arcanez: I use iTunes on Windows 7 at home though
283[19:11] arcanez: ilmari: I'm a gnome guy
284[19:11] arcanez: perhaps I'd like E
285[19:11] • ilmari ponders trying awseome
286[19:11] frew: ribasushi: we'll burn that bridge tomorrow
287[19:12] ribasushi: yup, just re-nagging
288[19:12] arcanez: someone buy me a mac mini
289[19:12] ilmari: arcanez: I use gnome on karmic at home, but at work I like the ability to grow and pack windows with the keyboard
290[19:12] mo: how do I create a branch?
291[19:12] arcanez: is karmic the next ubuntu release name?
292[19:12] mo: ribasushi: can you branch it for me?
293[19:12] arcanez: mo: svn cp
294[19:12] ilmari: arcanez: yeh, 9.10 LTS aka karmic koala
295[19:12] ribasushi: mo: sv[kn] cp <what> <where>
296[19:13] ilmari: 10.04 hasn't been named yet
297[19:13] mo: dbic svn?
298[19:13] purl: dbic svn is probably http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class
299[19:13] arcanez: ilmari: what # whas jaunty
300[19:13] • ilmari hopes for leaping llama
301[19:13] ilmari: arcanez: 9.04
302[19:13] ilmari: it's <year>.<month>
303[19:13] • dhoss still needs to update
304[19:13] ilmari: rather, <year-2000>.<month>
305[19:14] ilmari: which works nicely for such a young distro
306[19:14] mo: arcanez: ribasushi thanks
307[19:14] ribasushi: we should switch dbic versions to that <Y-2000>.0MM0DD
308[19:14] arcanez: ribasushi: that wouldn't get confusing
309[19:15] mst: ribasushi: VOM
310[19:15] arcanez: purl, vom?
311[19:15] purl: vom is, like, volt-ohm-meter
312[19:15] mo: ribasushi: Y-2000.DDD
313[19:15] ribasushi: mst: vom?
314[19:15] purl: i think vom is volt-ohm-meter
315[19:16] ribasushi: hm