Maximilian Roos

> Perhaps this is not a problem for the parser at the moment but given that we may want to use `->` for lambda function definitions (as alluded to in...

What's the logic for the extra arrow type? That functions and switch expression are sufficiently different and so should have different syntax? I think we should have as little different...

> I don't know, ... it just seems to lack enough gravitas or strength to "move" you to the expression on the right 🤷‍♂️ Does that make any sense? I...

What do you think about having both be `=>` @aljazerzen ? Or you're still concerned about the clashing? --- Re the clashing — with enough context, there's no ambiguity, we're...

Thanks for the issue @BCsabaEngine . > First is the > `` const sql = compile(`from employees | select first_name`); `` > instead of the > `` const sql =...

Super, thanks! CC @aljazerzen on the names for the public API

Yeah, this is a downside of not using `USING (foo)` any longer — instead we use `ON x.foo = y.foo` — but that means that multiple tables can't be joined...

> Given that we decide in favor of option 1 from #1193, this should error out. I'm not sure we've decided this yet! :) (Though nod to Do-ocracy...) > As...

The issue with having concepts such as `last` is it makes the pipeline state much more complicated — we have to consider the order of the transforms that came before...

> Current behavior is indeed pragmatic and tedious, there should be a better way to do it. (typo? Or you mean it is pragmatic?)