Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Dynamodb writeitem #799

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 28, 2022
Merged

Dynamodb writeitem #799

merged 5 commits into from
Jul 28, 2022

Conversation

endgame
Copy link
Collaborator

@endgame endgame commented Jul 27, 2022

Closes #798

@divarvel can you see if this is better for you?

  • Changelog entry

@endgame endgame added this to the 2.0 milestone Jul 27, 2022
@divarvel
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for the change! this makes things easier indeed.
The only thing i'm not sure of is the use of Data.Map (instead of Data.Map.Strict or a HashMap, which seem to be used a bit more in amazonka-adjacent code)

@endgame
Copy link
Collaborator Author

endgame commented Jul 27, 2022

Data.Map.Strict is probably a good idea both here and with AttributeValue, but I think that moving towards Map of some kind is a good long-term move because a) you avoid accidentally-quadratic behaviour when merging many maps, and b) aeson's internal type for KeyMap switched over to Map.

@endgame
Copy link
Collaborator Author

endgame commented Jul 28, 2022

Actually, it doesn't matter whether we import Data.Map.Lazy or Data.Map.Strict as we're only importing the type name.

@endgame endgame merged commit 34b5c64 into brendanhay:main Jul 28, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

amazonka-dynamodb: WriteRequest should be a sum type
3 participants