Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make classIdsToClassNames explicit parameter independent of UseJsPropertyName #7264

Open
wants to merge 11 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

khanaffan
Copy link
Contributor

@khanaffan khanaffan commented Oct 14, 2024

Previous behavior

UseJsPropertyName also implicitly mean ClassIdToClassName was true. But if explicitly specified ClassIdToClassName: false we did not return classId(s) instead it will still return class names.

New behavior

UseJsPropertyName still default to ClassIdToClassName: true unless ClassIdToClassName: false is specified. If false was specified, then classId(s) are returned.

Instance query when use with option USE_JS_NAMES continue to return UseJsPropertyName: true, ClassIdToClassName: true.

@soham-bentley added new test for various permutations of ECSqlRowFormat, classIdToClassNames & abbrivateBlob.

imodel-native: iTwin/imodel-native#883

@khanaffan khanaffan changed the title Affank/make classid2classname explicit Make classIdsToClassNames explicit parameter independent of useJsName Oct 14, 2024
@khanaffan khanaffan changed the title Make classIdsToClassNames explicit parameter independent of useJsName Make classIdsToClassNames explicit parameter independent of UseJsPropertyName Oct 14, 2024
@khanaffan khanaffan marked this pull request as ready for review October 15, 2024 19:47
@khanaffan khanaffan requested review from a team as code owners October 15, 2024 19:47
Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Oct 19, 2024

This pull request is now in conflicts. Could you fix it @khanaffan? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you can check out it locally. See documentation: https://help.github.com/articles/checking-out-pull-requests-locally/

@aruniverse
Copy link
Member

does this need to be in a 4.9 patch?

@khanaffan khanaffan requested a review from a team as a code owner November 4, 2024 14:39
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.

5 participants