We have moved to GitHub Issues
Created by Pete Duncanson 16 Jan 2017, 12:30:09 Updated by Pete Duncanson 21 Aug 2018, 13:34:38
This folks is a non-essential item however for the long term it would be a good thing to do. I think some new devs coming to Umbraco might get a bad smell if they the see how it handles bools from the DB so should be a good thing to iron out for perception sake as well as consistency and even some performance gains too.
For legacy reasons (as confirmed by @hartvig) bools are stored as number field and only 0/1 being recognised values. In DB circles this is dirty as it wastes space and CPU cycles when there is a built in bool field in every DB Umbraco is compat with.
Internally to Umbraco it could be possible to replace the fields however it could cause a bunch of headaches if not careful/thought about:
Give all the above I think this makes it a great case for doing with v8 when "breaking changes" are allowed/expected.
Can anyone else think of any reasons why we shouldn't do this?
@zpqrtbnk is this on the cards for V8?
@zpqrtbnk as above :)
Type: Feature (request)
Backwards Compatible: True
Due in version: