Peter Solnica
Peter Solnica
@flash-gordon not sure if I understand - do you mean that we should stop handling function building via method_missing and go the explicit route with a list of available functions?
@flash-gordon OK fair enough 😄 so it seems like this bug is caused by the lack of `in` method defined on `ROM::SQL::Function`
@renatolond actually, it's not intentional - [`ROM::SQL::Attribute#is`](https://github.com/rom-rb/rom-sql/blob/f3ef5817462c4915f37d0523ea2a2ba95c36a9de/lib/rom/sql/attribute.rb#L186-L188) uses Sequels `=~` operator which supports array arg too (just like `in`). This should be unified somehow, because [`ROM::SQL::Function#is`](https://github.com/rom-rb/rom-sql/blob/f3ef5817462c4915f37d0523ea2a2ba95c36a9de/lib/rom/sql/function.rb#L100-L104) doesn't do the same...
This won't make it into 2.0.0. I changed the milestone to 2.1.0. My plan was to introduce a nice validation solution for association setup, as it's easy to mess up...
OK I'm not sure if this is a bug after all. `tickets` is not a typical join table (it would be if it had a `belongs_to :passes` and `has_many-through` is...
@flash-gordon wdyt about supporting has-many-through when join table is not a typical join table that has both FKs, and instead it 'has-many' targets?
@paddor it's not a bug, it's intentional that certain lower level methods don't use coercion. We should properly document it though.
I forgot we have `error?`. Currently it expects path arg but we can set it to the default key, so you could have: ```ruby rule(:foo) do error? # expands to...
@flash-gordon why?
@flash-gordon ok makes sense