Draft
Conversation
SindreSB
changed the title
Contributor
|
Given the popularity of Azure Functions, I'm in support of this change. Thanks for putting it forward. So long as we implement this in a way that does not break backwards compatibility for existing users (and a quick glance at your changes indicates this is the case), I'm good with it. |
Author
|
I'm currently facing some issues with using the library with Azure Functions, but once I figure those out I'll pick up on this PR. :) |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi, this is more of a draft to get feedback on whether this is a wanted change.
When using Azure Functions, the Azure Table binding will give you a Cloud Table directly. This can be used with the library simply by getting the underlying client and table name, but I think it would be useful and simpler if this library support working on a table directly.
I haven't fully tested these changes, but wanted to get feedback on whether this is a useful change, or if you see any issues or anything speaking against it?