Remember scope target class, improved description of scope methods#96
Merged
Conversation
added 3 commits
April 2, 2014 19:32
Store the class of the results returned by a scope find method. This class is different from the "targetClass" when the relations is using a third "through" model (e.g. hasAndBelongsToMany).
test/relations: hasMany should fetch all scoped instances The test is passing with the current implementation.
The description is used by client SDK code-generators like loopback-angularjs.
|
All is well |
Contributor
|
LGTM |
bajtos
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 4, 2014
…class Remember scope target class, improved description of scope methods
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Two changes needed by loopback-angular to correctly generate code for calling scope methods.
The commit re-enabling a skipped test is unrelated.
/to @raymondfeng please review.