fix: Rely on equal for computing contains #668
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
santialbo
force-pushed
the
patch-3
branch
3 times, most recently
from
5c16a4a
to
bb9f432
Compare
This change allows contains to be computed using the toValue of the items in the array. Before this change if I had an array of "Drop" `contains` would not match against the value.
harttle
requested changes
Feb 10, 2024
harttle
changed the title
Co-authored-by: Jun Yang <harttleharttle@gmail.com>
harttle
approved these changes
Feb 14, 2024
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 10.10.1 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This change allows the
containsto be computed using thetoValueof the items in the array.Before this change if I had an array of "Drop"
containswould not match against the value.this is not valid liquid, this is just to explain the case i'm trying to fix
with the changes on this pr, it will return true.