-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.5k
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
feat: add pattern match line filter #12398
Merged
Merged
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
d07c160
feat: add pattern match line filter
kolesnikovae c05fbf2
test naming
kolesnikovae 90b6394
bloom tester
kolesnikovae 08529a4
fix syntax
kolesnikovae 747e421
Merge branch 'main' into kolesnikovae-pattern-filter
kolesnikovae b010505
update CHANGELOG.md
kolesnikovae File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is debatable, but I think it makes sense: if a user tries to parse fields at the filter stage, it's better to return an explicit error rather than silently ignore the user's intent. In the future, the restriction can be removed.
Note that we're using an unnamed placeholder <_>. I think we could use a new capture identifier (such as <*>) to emphasize the difference with the pattern parse stage. However, it feels like a new syntax for pattern matching, which may confuse users. I would like to hear others' thoughts on this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't have strong opinitions using _ vs * but I definitively agree we should fail fast.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would vote for
<_>
as the behavior between these two examples feels consistent to me:I think of that as telling Loki to ignore any of the content in
<_>
I'm not sure I see the reason to use
<*>
or maybe I'm misunderstanding something?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This popped up in the Slack conversation, so I brought it here.
Thank you, guys, for sharing your thoughts. I keep
<_>
.