MudDataGrid: Allow overriding default filter operators per column

[Anu6is]

Description

Added a FilterOperators property to the data grid Column. If supplied, these operators would be used instead of the default Type operators. This allows developers to control the filter operators available to the end user.

Note: New operators cannot be created, the must already exist in the list of default operators.

Resolves #8996

How Has This Been Tested?

Visually and Unit Tests

Type of Changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Documentation (fix or improvement to the website or code docs)

Checklist

• The PR is submitted to the correct branch (dev).
• My code follows the code style of this project.
• I've added relevant tests.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 76.92308% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 91.56%. Comparing base (ac1d69c) to head (57a04cc).
Report is 1 commits behind head on dev.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/MudBlazor/Components/DataGrid/Column.razor.cs	90.90%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
src/MudBlazor/Components/DataGrid/Filter.cs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...azor/Components/DataGrid/FilterHeaderCell.razor.cs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev   #10254      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   91.54%   91.56%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         415      415              
  Lines       13017    13025       +8     
  Branches     2457     2460       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits        11917    11926       +9     
+ Misses        549      547       -2     
- Partials      551      552       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

---

🚨 Try these New Features:

• Flaky Tests Detection - Detect and resolve failed and flaky tests
• JS Bundle Analysis - Avoid shipping oversized bundles

[tjscience]

Everything looks good, aside from the small improvement in GetFilterOperators.

[tjscience]

It seems unnecessary to use a collection expression here. You can just use FilterOperators.ToArray() which is much lighter.

[ScarletKuro]

You can just use FilterOperators.ToArray() which is much lighter.

I think that's pretty much the same.

Can't we just use IReadOnlyCollection? Then no ToArray is needed that will allocate since HashSet implements it
I don't think we need access by indexer here?
I would say IReadOnlyCollection > Array most of the time

[tjscience]

It's not the same. Although, it is a small difference. I do agree that IReadOnlyCollection here would prevent the need for a conversion to an array. The collection expression just leads to unnecessary IL is all.

[ScarletKuro]

It's not the same. Although, it is a small difference.

You are right, actually I looked in sharplab and it generates

    private string[] Array
    {
        get
        {
            HashSet<string> filterOperators = FilterOperators;
            int num = 0;
            string[] array = new string[filterOperators.Count];
            HashSet<string>.Enumerator enumerator = filterOperators.GetEnumerator();
            try
            {
                while (enumerator.MoveNext())
                {
                    string text = (array[num] = enumerator.Current);
                    num++;
                }
                return array;
            }
            finally
            {
                ((IDisposable)enumerator).Dispose();
            }
        }
    }

for HashSet. I really thought expression collection is more smarter and would fallback to simple .ToArray lol.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud