id,node_id,number,title,user,state,locked,assignee,milestone,comments,created_at,updated_at,closed_at,author_association,pull_request,body,repo,type,active_lock_reason,performed_via_github_app,reactions,draft,state_reason
1392690202,I_kwDOCGYnMM5TAsQa,495,Support JSON values returned from .convert() functions,649467,closed,0,,,3,2022-09-30T16:33:49Z,2022-10-25T21:23:37Z,2022-10-25T21:23:28Z,NONE,,"When using the convert function on a JSON column, the result of the conversion function must be a string. If the return value is either a dict (object) or a list (array), the convert call will error out with an unhelpful user defined function exception. 

It makes sense that since the original column value was a string and required conversion to data structures, the result should be converted back into a JSON string as well. However, other functions auto-convert to JSON string representation, so the fact that convert doesn't could be surprising.

At least the documentation should note this requirement, because the sqlite error messages won't readily reveal the issue.

Jf only sqlite's JSON column type meant something :)",140912432,issue,,,"{""url"": ""https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/495/reactions"", ""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,completed
815554385,MDU6SXNzdWU4MTU1NTQzODU=,237,"db[""my_table""].drop(ignore=True) parameter, plus sqlite-utils drop-table --ignore and drop-view --ignore",649467,closed,0,,,3,2021-02-24T14:55:06Z,2021-02-25T17:11:41Z,2021-02-25T17:11:41Z,NONE,,"When I'm generating a derived table in python, I often drop the table and create it from scratch. However, the first time I generate the table, it doesn't exist, so the drop raises an exception.  That means more boilerplate.

I was going to submit a pull request that adds an ""if_exists"" option to the `drop` method of tables and views. 

However, for a utility like sqlite_utils, perhaps the ""IF EXISTS"" SQL semantics is what you want most of the time, and thus should be the default.

What do you think?",140912432,issue,,,"{""url"": ""https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/237/reactions"", ""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,completed
783778672,MDU6SXNzdWU3ODM3Nzg2NzI=,220,Better error message for *_fts methods against views,649467,closed,0,,,3,2021-01-11T23:24:00Z,2021-02-22T20:44:51Z,2021-02-14T22:34:26Z,NONE,,"enable_fts and its related methods only work on tables, not views. 

Could those methods and possibly others move up to the Queryable superclass?
",140912432,issue,,,"{""url"": ""https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/sqlite-utils/issues/220/reactions"", ""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,completed
276091279,MDU6SXNzdWUyNzYwOTEyNzk=,144,apsw as alternative sqlite3 binding (for full text search),649467,closed,0,,,3,2017-11-22T14:40:39Z,2018-05-28T21:29:42Z,2018-05-28T21:29:42Z,NONE,,"Hey there,

Have you considered providing apsw support as an alternative to stock python sqlite3?  I use apsw because it keeps up with sqlite3 and is straightforward to bring in extensions like FTS5.  FTS really accelerates the kind of searching often done by web clients.

I may be able to help (it shouldn't be much code), but there are a couple of stylistic questions that come up when supporting an optional package.  Also, apsw is tricky in that it doesn't have a pypi package (author says limitations in providing options to setup.py). ",107914493,issue,,,"{""url"": ""https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/144/reactions"", ""total_count"": 0, ""+1"": 0, ""-1"": 0, ""laugh"": 0, ""hooray"": 0, ""confused"": 0, ""heart"": 0, ""rocket"": 0, ""eyes"": 0}",,completed