github-starred/actual
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/actualbudget/actual.git synced 2026-03-10 04:02:38 -05:00
Code Issues 250 Packages Projects Releases 53 Wiki Activity

[PR #2044] [CLOSED] [Maintanence] Harden types in core database functions #4083

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-02-28 20:51:16 -06:00 by GiteaMirror · 0 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-28 20:51:16 -06:00
Owner
Copy Link

📋 Pull Request Information

Original PR: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/pull/2044
Author: @kymckay
Created: 12/6/2023
Status: ❌ Closed

Base: master ← Head: tsx-db

📝 Commits (1)

  • 3a8cef8 Harden types in core generic database functions

📊 Changes

1 file changed (+51 additions, -43 deletions)

View changed files

📝 packages/loot-core/src/server/db/index.ts (+51 -43)

📄 Description

Opening as draft before going further with this because a thought occurred to me which could use some more input:

The way I've typed this so far is quite generic to facilitate the way these functions are used across different tables where the common structure is the ID column. However, to be exhaustively strict with typing we could alternatively have an overload for every possible table and the type it stores (that is, where functions have table: string, row: DatabaseRow instead having a set of overloaded functions like table: "payees", row: PayeeEntity).

There's a trade off here between strictness of typing and maintainability. The more exhaustive approach would ensure use of these functions is strictly correct, but the code is then tightly coupled to the database structure which means maintaining and updating both in tandem (in an ideal world something like this could be done with codegen whenever the database changes).

Should I continue with the more generic approach in the diff here, or switch to the more exhaustive approach described?

🔄 This issue represents a GitHub Pull Request. It cannot be merged through Gitea due to API limitations.

## 📋 Pull Request Information **Original PR:** https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/pull/2044 **Author:** [@kymckay](https://github.com/kymckay) **Created:** 12/6/2023 **Status:** ❌ Closed **Base:** `master` ← **Head:** `tsx-db` --- ### 📝 Commits (1) - [`3a8cef8`](https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/commit/3a8cef8e8d699c4bad98a8ae0c40bfb03810ebf5) Harden types in core generic database functions ### 📊 Changes **1 file changed** (+51 additions, -43 deletions) <details> <summary>View changed files</summary> 📝 `packages/loot-core/src/server/db/index.ts` (+51 -43) </details> ### 📄 Description Opening as draft before going further with this because a thought occurred to me which could use some more input: The way I've typed this so far is quite generic to facilitate the way these functions are used across different tables where the common structure is the ID column. However, to be exhaustively strict with typing we could alternatively have an overload for every possible table and the type it stores (that is, where functions have `table: string, row: DatabaseRow` instead having a set of overloaded functions like `table: "payees", row: PayeeEntity`). There's a trade off here between strictness of typing and maintainability. The more exhaustive approach would ensure use of these functions is strictly correct, but the code is then tightly coupled to the database structure which means maintaining and updating both in tandem (in an ideal world something like this could be done with codegen whenever the database changes). Should I continue with the more generic approach in the diff here, or switch to the more exhaustive approach described? --- <sub>🔄 This issue represents a GitHub Pull Request. It cannot be merged through Gitea due to API limitations.</sub>
GiteaMirror added the pull-request label 2026-02-28 20:51:16 -06:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
AI generated
API
bank sync
budgeting
bug
can’t replicate
dependencies
docker
documentation
electron
experimental feature
feature
feedback
goal templates
good first issue
help wanted
importers
maintenance
needs info
needs testing
needs triage
needs votes
openid
payees
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 regression
reports
responsive
rules
schedules
server
✨ merged
split transactions
tech debt
theme
transaction import
transaction reconciliation
transactions
translations
upstream
user interface
✅ approved
wontfix
No Label pull-request
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
GiteaMirror ninjasurge
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/actual#4083
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?