Maximilian Roos

> In my use case I am asking customers to learn PRQL; and having to ask them to learn regex when LIKE is all they need feels unnecessary. Yes, that's...

> What about `company_name::string | in "[%]Amazo[%]"`? (square brackets mean optional) My concern with this is that we're inventing a new regex format. While that example is good, we then...

Closing in favor of #562 as discussed there

As ever, I'm keen to prioritize whatever people need to make PRQL more helpful for folks. While my initial inclination is to downweigh DML, I'm open to ideas, and one...

Closing as completed. I'm yet to work this into the Jupyter extension though.

> Where do we currently use `prql-compiler` name? cargo crate that is the cli? Yes, and the brew recipe

For sure! Definitely my area

Edit: @snth beat me to it --- > and possibly remove Cli structs from prql-compiler library crate. > publish a new crate `prqlc`, Why split the crates up though? Isn't...

We currently publish both the library and binary as a single crate — the change would be to the binary name. `pq` is a good example!

Yes, this is one tradeoff of not using `USING` — we don't collapse the duplicate columns. We had some discussion on this in https://github.com/PRQL/prql/issues/1206 & https://github.com/PRQL/prql/issues/1138 (and possibly others). In...