issue_comments

Table actions

7 rows where issue = 520681725 and user = 9599 sorted by updated_at descending

✎ View and edit SQL

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

Suggested facets: created_at (date), updated_at (date)

user 1

  • simonw · 7 ✖

issue 1

  • Syntax for ?_through= that works as a form field · 7 ✖

author_association 1

id html_url issue_url node_id user created_at updated_at ▲ author_association body reactions issue performed_via_github_app
997120723 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/621#issuecomment-997120723 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/621 IC_kwDOBm6k_c47btrT simonw 9599 2021-12-18T01:42:33Z 2021-12-18T01:42:33Z OWNER

I refactored this code out into the filters.py module in aa7f0037a46eb76ae6fe9bf2a1f616c58738ecdf

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
 Syntax for ?_through= that works as a form field 520681725  
994005634 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/621#issuecomment-994005634 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/621 IC_kwDOBm6k_c47P1KC simonw 9599 2021-12-14T21:02:50Z 2021-12-14T21:02:50Z OWNER

This would also mean that an extra text input box could be easily shown on the page.

https://latest-with-plugins.datasette.io/fixtures/roadside_attractions?_through={"table":"roadside_attraction_characteristics","column":"characteristic_id","value":"1"} but with the annotated box added (and made to look good):

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
 Syntax for ?_through= that works as a form field 520681725  
993958242 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/621#issuecomment-993958242 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/621 IC_kwDOBm6k_c47Ppli simonw 9599 2021-12-14T20:33:25Z 2021-12-14T20:33:56Z OWNER

Alternative idea: since current syntax is:

?_through={"table":"roadside_attraction_characteristics","column":"characteristic_id","value":"1"}

The form-encoding-friendly syntax could be:

?_through.{"table":"roadside_attraction_characteristics","column":"characteristic_id"}=1

Which is more consistent than the array proposal:

?_through.["roadside_attraction_characteristics","characteristic_id"]=1

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
 Syntax for ?_through= that works as a form field 520681725  
993813210 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/621#issuecomment-993813210 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/621 IC_kwDOBm6k_c47PGLa simonw 9599 2021-12-14T17:30:13Z 2021-12-14T20:23:57Z OWNER

Might be able to create a web form that's unambiguous using:

https://latest.datasette.io/fixtures/roadside_attractions?_through.["roadside_attraction_characteristics","characteristic_id"]=1

So:

html <input type="text" name="_through.["roadside_attraction_characteristics","characteristic_id"]' value="1"> I'm pretty confident this is allowed by the HTML specification. This works:

```html

<form action="https://httpbin.org/get"> </form>

``` ASGI parsing seems to work too: https://latest-with-plugins.datasette.io/-/asgi-scope?_through.[%22roadside_attraction_characteristics%22%2C%22characteristic_id%22]=1

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
 Syntax for ?_through= that works as a form field 520681725  
552253208 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/621#issuecomment-552253208 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/621 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDU1MjI1MzIwOA== simonw 9599 2019-11-11T00:39:57Z 2019-11-11T00:39:57Z OWNER

This is a nice opportunity to help with the refactoring of the table view in #617 - the above code snippet takes the request, looks at the _through= parameters and appends things to the where_clauses, params and extra_human_descriptions lists. I can factor that out into a separate private method on TableView and use that as a pattern for further refactoring.

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
 Syntax for ?_through= that works as a form field 520681725  
552251645 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/621#issuecomment-552251645 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/621 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDU1MjI1MTY0NQ== simonw 9599 2019-11-11T00:23:56Z 2019-11-11T00:33:31Z OWNER

Current syntax: https://datasette.readthedocs.io/en/stable/json_api.html#special-table-arguments

/?_through={"table":"roadside_attraction_characteristics","column":"characteristic_id","value":"1"}

Demo: https://latest.datasette.io/fixtures/roadside_attractions?_through={%22table%22:%22roadside_attraction_characteristics%22,%22column%22:%22characteristic_id%22,%22value%22:%221%22}

The alternative syntax for that could be:

https://latest.datasette.io/fixtures/roadside_attractions?_through.roadside_attraction_characteristics.characteristic_id=1

 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
 Syntax for ?_through= that works as a form field 520681725  
552251666 https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/621#issuecomment-552251666 https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/621 MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDU1MjI1MTY2Ng== simonw 9599 2019-11-11T00:24:09Z 2019-11-11T00:32:49Z OWNER 
{
    "total_count": 0,
    "+1": 0,
    "-1": 0,
    "laugh": 0,
    "hooray": 0,
    "confused": 0,
    "heart": 0,
    "rocket": 0,
    "eyes": 0
}
 Syntax for ?_through= that works as a form field 520681725  

Advanced export

JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object

CSV options: 

CREATE TABLE [issue_comments] (
   [html_url] TEXT,
   [issue_url] TEXT,
   [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
   [node_id] TEXT,
   [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]),
   [created_at] TEXT,
   [updated_at] TEXT,
   [author_association] TEXT,
   [body] TEXT,
   [reactions] TEXT,
   [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id])
, [performed_via_github_app] TEXT);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue]
                ON [issue_comments] ([issue]);
CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user]
                ON [issue_comments] ([user]);