Björn Rabenstein
Björn Rabenstein
Given there was no response by @roidelapluie (and this was assigned to him by me, not self-assigned), it's safe to assume he is not working on it. @kushalShukla-web I'll assign...
@machine424 are you planning to review this?
@machine424 have you seen that this is ready for review?
I guess this doesn't matter in reguler Prometheus usage, but it helps for testing and for those that use the engine as a library.
> > Calling Close from main() still looks pointless to me. > > @beorn7 WDYT, should I drop this part? It doesn't change anything in practice, but it still demonstrates...
There have been thoughts around this for a long time, see [this exploratory document](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jMeDsLvDfO92Qnry_JLAXalvMRzMSB1sBr9V7LolpYM/edit#), some parts of which are already implemented, some are [being worked on](https://github.com/prometheus/prometheus/pull/9138), and some are somewhat...
I would say we shouldn't look at arithmetic for the `@` modifier in isolation, but for all durations. The challenge here is that we need in a way a new...
It will touch the parser, for sure, but it might also require quite deep changes in the PromQL engine (which I don't know well enough to tell).
Hello from the bug scrub! This is still a valid issue. We changed the title to clarify that this is more than just about the @ argument.
How about `(foo + bar) or foo`?