Disable type conversion for Set and Array condition values

[andrykonchin]

Fix contains operator for set fields

Example:
Document.where("set.contains" => "foo").all

Related issue #220

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.01%) to 97.336% when pulling 9813761 on fix-set-contains-condition into fb9db64 on master.

[richardhsu]

Shouldn't this be the else case below? So really the else case is wrong because the dump field won't work correctly since the type is array even though it's acting on individual values of the array.

Just quick glance, almost seems like this really should just always be, right?

source.dump_field(value, source.attributes[key.to_sym]

[andrykonchin]

@richardhsu I think it shouldn't

The value may be collection (Set or Array) in following cases:

• in operator - where("field.in" => [1, 2, 3])
• between operator - where("field.between" => [0, 10])
• equal operator for set/array - where(set_field: Set.new([1, 2, 3]))

We have to handle cases 1, 2 and 3 in different way. For cases 1, 2 we have to convert each element of collection. For case 3 we have convert the whole value (to set or array)

else case handles cases 1, 2. And here I disable/postpone handling case 3 in order to simplify code. It's a complex logic because we have to take into account not only field type but operator. For instance for set field operator equal expects set but contains expects type of set element - number or string

[pboling]

Thanks for the explanation!

[richardhsu]

Ah perfect, @andrykonchin thanks for explanation!

[pboling]

Great specs