[5.5] Allow passing a callback to "with" #21445
Conversation
JosephSilber
force-pushed
the
with-callback
branch
from
3f21492
to
89db192
Compare
* upstream/5.5: (84 commits) Correct docBlock depenency on syncWithoutDetaching (laravel#21478) update v5.5 changelog allow to specify the queue while scheduling of queued jobs (laravel#21473) [5.5] Clear CountQuery "select" bindings since we're overriding the columns anyway (laravel#21468) add interface access pivot on resource update v5.5 changelog extract trait Fix docblock in Route (laravel#21454) fix test formatting Fix Relation::morphMap() merge (issue laravel#21457). (laravel#21458) extract AnonymousResourceCollection into class to allow serialization revert relationship limits Fix spelling of 'optionally' [5.5] Fix Collection::contains() when the found value is null (laravel#21442) Allow passing a callback to "with" (laravel#21445) [5.5] Add relation and model attributes in RelationNotFoundException (laravel#21426) [5.5] Make sure sql for virtual columns is added after the unsigned modifier (laravel#21441) vendor:publish options alphabetized (laravel#21412) ...
|
I just found about this PR, and it surprised me how it was instantly merged, while #20987 from a few days earlier had been closed without a comment... |
|
@alepeino the use-case described in that PR sounds like it should be using While the code is the same, the way it was presented is different. And for someone juggling tons of PRs daily, the proper description can make all the difference. |
|
Yes, I agree this wording is clearer, even though the use-case is evident from the test and from the comparison with a well-known library such as Lodash. Don't get me wrong, I'm still glad the feature is merged in, it just felt a little confusing, and disappointing too, being a communication issue like you say, not having the opportunity to reply and do a better explanation. Anyway, cheers |
Similar to
tap, but returns the value from the callback.