feat: add filter to aggregate_functions
#168
Merged
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
dmfay
approved these changes
Jun 29, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah I don't think it's worth going to the effort of distinguishing invocation-with-filter from a regular invocation without going to the much greater effort of distinguishing aggregates from invocations full stop, and I don't think the latter is time well spent for us at least at the moment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 am not sure if the
filter_expressionshould be inside the choice node our outside. Currently, a normal invocation can be followed by thefilter_expression. (which is probably fine.)Closes #167