SeaQuery 1.0 blog #150
Merged
SeaQuery 1.0 blog #150
+822
−1
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
|
Expurple
reviewed
Aug 18, 2025
Comment on lines
16
to
22
| ## Architectural changes | ||
|
|
||
| There are a few architectural changes that can only be made by breaking the API, so let's go through them one by one: | ||
|
|
||
| ### Forbid unsafe code | ||
|
|
||
| #![forbid(unsafe_code)] has been added to all workspace crates, ensuring that SeaQuery no longer contains any unsafe code. While only one instance of unsafe was previously used, and has now been removed, this change reinforces our commitment to maintaining code quality. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This reads a little weird because #![forbid(unsafe_code)] isn't a breaking change for the users (or a big internal architectural change, really). But it's still good to advertize in front of the list. Maybe do it like this?
Suggested change
| ## Architectural changes | |
| There are a few architectural changes that can only be made by breaking the API, so let's go through them one by one: | |
| ### Forbid unsafe code | |
| #![forbid(unsafe_code)] has been added to all workspace crates, ensuring that SeaQuery no longer contains any unsafe code. While only one instance of unsafe was previously used, and has now been removed, this change reinforces our commitment to maintaining code quality. | |
| ## Forbid unsafe code | |
| #![forbid(unsafe_code)] has been added to all workspace crates, ensuring that SeaQuery no longer contains any unsafe code. While only one instance of unsafe was previously used, and has now been removed, this change reinforces our commitment to maintaining code quality. | |
| ## Architectural changes | |
| There are a few architectural changes that can only be made by breaking the API, so let's go through them one by one: |
Or we can just keep it as is.
|
would appreciate a second read @Huliiiiii @Expurple https://www.sea-ql.org/preview/pr-150/blog/2025-08-20-sea-query-1.0/ |
Expurple
approved these changes
Aug 25, 2025
Expurple
reviewed
Aug 26, 2025
Comment on lines
469
to
473
| * `IntoCondition` [#939](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/939) | ||
| * `IntoColumnRef` [#959](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/959) | ||
| * `IntoTableRef` [#958](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/958) | ||
| * `IntoTypeRef` [#969](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/969) | ||
| * `IntoValueTuple` [#960](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/960) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done with the Into* traits.
Although, now I also want to experiment with removing Expr::TypeName before the release: SeaQL/sea-query#954 (comment)
Suggested change
| * `IntoCondition` [#939](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/939) | |
| * `IntoColumnRef` [#959](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/959) | |
| * `IntoTableRef` [#958](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/958) | |
| * `IntoTypeRef` [#969](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/969) | |
| * `IntoValueTuple` [#960](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/960) | |
| * `IntoColumnDef` [#975](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/975) | |
| * `IntoColumnRef` [#959](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/959) | |
| * `IntoCondition` [#939](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/939) | |
| * `IntoIden` [#973](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/973) | |
| * `IntoIndexColumn` [#976](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/976) | |
| * `IntoLikeExpr` [#974](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/974) | |
| * `IntoTableRef` [#958](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/958) | |
| * `IntoTypeRef` [#969](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/969) | |
| * `IntoValueTuple` [#960](https://github.com/SeaQL/sea-query/pull/960) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Although, now I also want to experiment with removing Expr::TypeName before the release
it should be fine, we're still in rc. oh we missed this week's this-week-in-rust. let's publish it next week then.
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 slowly writing it now