feat: Add flag to allow ignoring proto statements #232
Conversation
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
* Check to see if a DDL references a table that doesn't exist * Check to see if a DDL references a column that doesn't exist * Check to see if a DDL references a foreign key that references a column that doesn't exist
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
While we're waiting on #205, this PR allows users to ignore proto statements in their DDLs. The parser and differ will ignore any proto statements if they encounter any in the DDL, so the responsibility is on the user to use this feature accordingly. However, this unblocks any use case where the user would still like to have the tool be able to parse DDLs with proto statements even if it means just ignoring them for the time being.