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

New Feature: Non Geo Table Entities / Tables #62

Closed
pepperlk opened this issue Dec 9, 2019 · 5 comments
Closed

New Feature: Non Geo Table Entities / Tables #62

pepperlk opened this issue Dec 9, 2019 · 5 comments

Comments

@pepperlk
Copy link

pepperlk commented Dec 9, 2019

Need to abstract out the Feature to not include a IGeometry for basic table ops.

@davetimmins
Copy link
Owner

Did you have a particular use case thats not supported at the moment? Tables should work, you can set the Feature to use an arbitrary geometry or the IGeometry type. It'd be similar to using a feature but not returning geometry from operations

@pepperlk
Copy link
Author

I am currently building an ORM on top of your library and not specifying the Geometry type would be useful is all because yes they do work, but not quite like id like.. Also ill own this one and would like to share the ORM feature with it if I can as well, look for a PR in the next little bit.
(Never ask for a feature if you cant help out right??)

@brudo
Copy link

brudo commented Apr 15, 2020

I agree; it would be more intuitive and readable if one could say await portalGateway.Query(new Query(...)) for queries where there is no geometry, or where you don't care about the geometry. But I will make due with specifying an arbitrary geometry type, and putting in a comment to indicate there is no geometry.

@brudo
Copy link

brudo commented Apr 29, 2020

Incidentally, you cannot use IGeometry as the type parameter; it must be a creatable type, or it fails at run time. I used Extent in my case, because at least Extent could not be an actual feature geometry, so it might cause a developer reading the code to pause and think about it. However, it still warrants a comment, and smells a bit funny.

A type that explicitly means "no geometry" and that implements IGeometry might be clearer than co-opting Extent or Point. Then to provide a friendly shorthand for the common case where geometry is not needed for the input or output, we could add something like public class Query: Query<UndefinedGeometry> {}.

@brudo
Copy link

brudo commented Jun 3, 2020

In follow-up, I notice that the fork maintained by @dymaptic includes a NoGeometry implementation and some other features specific to tables (initially from commits by @hbindervitti)

davetimmins added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 4, 2020
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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants