Fix Filter and Orderby in Expand applied on bound functions

[KenitoInc]

Issues

This pull request fixes #1162 .

Description

If we don't have an entity set path, the OperationSegment created doesn't have a TargetEdmNavigationSource. This cause the TargetNavigationSource in ODataPathInfo to be null.

For bound operation, this PR sets the TargetNavigationSource using the TargetEdmNavigationSource of the previous segment. e.g Take the request Get ~/People/My.Function.GetPeopleWithDogs($filter=ID eq 1) If GetPeopleWithDogs operation segment doesn't have a TargetEdmNavigationSource, we use the TargetEdmNavigationSource from the People entityset segment

Checklist (Uncheck if it is not completed)

• [ ] Test cases added
• [ ] Build and test with one-click build and test script passed

Additional work necessary

If documentation update is needed, please add "Docs Needed" label to the issue and provide details about the required document change in the issue.

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated[bot]]

This PR has 35 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +35 -0
Percentile : 14%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +35 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification) of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? :thumbsup:  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email) Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[KenitoInc]

I think there was a clear reason why by design, applying query options ($filter applied on $expand) required an EntitySetPath. The proposed fix in this PR was to assist in scenarios where the customer doesn't specify the EntitySetPath. I have looked at various solutions and I am unable to come up with a fix because of the following reasons: • The function only specifies a return type (IEdmType) not the return entity set • It not possible to get the correct entityset from an edmtype since we could have multiple entitysets from one edmtype.

It’s from the EntitySet that we get the TargetNavigationSource to use in creating the BindingState during semantic binding by SelectExpandBinder, FilterBinder etc.