Skip to content

Improved has{nt}_X implementation - #370

Open
RampantDespair wants to merge 3 commits into
theory:mainfrom
RampantDespair:dev2
Open

Improved has{nt}_X implementation#370
RampantDespair wants to merge 3 commits into
theory:mainfrom
RampantDespair:dev2

Conversation

@RampantDespair

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Closes #363 [2/3]

As discussed this is the first part of the PR split -> implementation symmetry, part 2.

All 4 now follow:

-- has{nt}_X( schema, table, description ) -- ( NAME, NAME, TEXT )
-- has{nt}_X( schema, table )              -- ( NAME, NAME )
-- has{nt}_X( table, description )         -- ( NAME, TEXT )
-- has{nt}_X( table )                      -- ( NAME )

@theory theory left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good. 50/72 commit message please.

Comment thread test/sql/fktap.sql Outdated
Comment thread test/sql/check.sql Outdated
Comment thread Changes
RampantDespair added a commit to RampantDespair/pgtap that referenced this pull request Jul 26, 2026
RampantDespair added a commit to RampantDespair/pgtap that referenced this pull request Jul 26, 2026
Added missing `schema, table` variants of `hasnt_pk()`, `has_fk()`,
`hasnt_fk()`, `has_unique()`, and `has_check()`, and added
`hasnt_unique()` and `hasnt_check()`. Also changed `has_unique()`
argument types from `TEXT` to `NAME` so they can share a consistent
overload order with the other constraint assertions.
@RampantDespair

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Please just use an integer

Done 060d87a (this PR)

Add credit to yourself and PR number like the above item.

Done a763ece (this PR)

Looks good. 50/72 commit message please.

Done, hopefully I didn't break anything by changing the existing history, but now the commit messages should be compliant.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants