in operator not working with null Guid values

[ElizabethOkerio]

Issues

This pull request fixes issue #1997 .

Description

Briefly describe the changes of this pull request.

For a sample model like the one shown below

public class TestEntity
{
   public guid? NullableProperty { get; set; }
}

Running the following sample query throws an error.
It is also been clear that a null GUID should not be equated to an empty GUID.

http://host/service/TestEntity?$filter=NullableProperty in (null)

Guid literals are converted to single-quoted form, so that they are compatible with the Json reader used for deserialization.

Sample: [D01663CF-EB21-4A0E-88E0-361C10ACE7FD, 492CF54A-84C9-490C-A7A4-B5010FAD8104]
==>  ['D01663CF-EB21-4A0E-88E0-361C10ACE7FD', '492CF54A-84C9-490C-A7A4-B5010FAD8104']

This means that even null GUIDS will be converted to the single quoted form which will later lead to them being processed as null strings. ("null").

Sample: [null, null]
==>  ['null', 'null']

This fix ensures that null GUIDs are not converted to the single-quoted form and are processed as null values.

Sample: [null] ==>  [null]

Checklist (Uncheck if it is not completed)

• Test cases added
• Build and test with one-click build and test script passed

Additional work necessary

If documentation update is needed, please add "Docs Needed" label to the issue and provide details about the required document change in the issue.

[habbes]

Could you add test cases for this?

[gathogojr]

Please add tests

[gathogojr]

Looks good to me but I have to wonder if the issue could have been resolved by changing this:

if (items[i][0] != '\'' && items[i][0] != '"')

to

if (items[i] != "null" && items[i][0] != '\'' && items[i][0] != '"')

Kindly confirm if that would do the job

[xuzhg]

[ElizabethOkerio]

Looks good to me but I have to wonder if the issue could have been resolved by changing this:

if (items[i][0] != '\'' && items[i][0] != '"')

to

if (items[i] != "null" && items[i][0] != '\'' && items[i][0] != '"')

Kindly confirm if that would do the job

We still need the else part:

if (items[i] != "null" && items[i][0] != '\'' && items[i][0] != '"')
{
}
else if(items[i] == "null")
{

} 

Because we need to assign the items[i]. And for the check we have to specify that it is a null coz it could be anything else that does not meet the first criteria.

[gathogojr]

Looks good to me but I have to wonder if the issue could have been resolved by changing this:

if (items[i][0] != '\'' && items[i][0] != '"')

to

if (items[i] != "null" && items[i][0] != '\'' && items[i][0] != '"')

Kindly confirm if that would do the job

We still need the else part:

if (items[i] != "null" && items[i][0] != '\'' && items[i][0] != '"')
{
}
else if(items[i] == "null")
{

} 

Because we need to assign the items[i]. And for the check we have to specify that it is a null coz it could be anything else that does not meet the first criteria.

Maybe I don't understand, but why would we need the else part? Assigning items[i] to items[i] is the same as leaving items[i] untouched and that would be accomplished by the check if (items[i] != "null"..., no?
I may not have full visibility though so I could be missing something

[ElizabethOkerio]

Looks good to me but I have to wonder if the issue could have been resolved by changing this:

if (items[i][0] != '\'' && items[i][0] != '"')

to

if (items[i] != "null" && items[i][0] != '\'' && items[i][0] != '"')

Kindly confirm if that would do the job

We still need the else part:

if (items[i] != "null" && items[i][0] != '\'' && items[i][0] != '"')
{
}
else if(items[i] == "null")
{

} 

Because we need to assign the items[i]. And for the check we have to specify that it is a null coz it could be anything else that does not meet the first criteria.

Maybe I don't understand, but why would we need the else part? Assigning items[i] to items[i] is the same as leaving items[i] untouched and that would be accomplished by the check if (items[i] != "null"..., no?
I may not have full visibility though so I could be missing something

Yes I get

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 6 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +3 -3
Percentile : 2.4%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +3 -3

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detetcted.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.