Open Stack

-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Leafe <ed at leafe.com>
Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Date: November 14, 2016 at 11:29:59
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [api]

> On Nov 14, 2016, at 6:04 AM, milanisko k wrote:
>  
> > I'd like to ask about possible ``=in:``[1] operator negation implementation
> > Should the implementation be a negative field name such as ``?state=in:a,b,c¬_state=in:x,y,z``?  
> > Or rather a negated operator: ``?state=in:a,b,c&state=not_in:x,y,z``?
> > There already is the ``=neq:`` operator specified in the filtering spec[1], so I guess  
> ``=not_in:/=nin:/=out:`` might be more appropriate?
>  
> The latter looks better to me. I’d like to get feedback on the exact choice of ``=not_in:/=nin:/=out:``  
> to recommend. Personally, I prefer ‘nin’, but I’ll defer to others on that.

not_in is nice and explicit while nin and out are a bit, more clever. I think we should avoid trying to be clever.

That said, what about something like

    state=!in:x,y,z

This just makes me nervous that we're beginning to define our own query language.

--  
Ian Cordasco