The New LookML IDE Shows New and Pre-Existing Parameters


(Tig Newman) #1

In new LookML, the vast majority of parameters will be your old familiar friends. The new LookML IDE shows you the available parameters so you’ll be able to easily find the parameter you want. You also can learn more about parameters you haven’t used before.

In the process, you may discover some parameters that existed in old LookML but you don’t recognize. In some cases, we hadn’t documented them – but we’re working on it! Only a few parameters are replacements for old LookML parameters.

The rest of this article lists:

  • the parameter changes in new LookML
  • the parameters that were available (but undocumented) in old LookML

Field-level Parameters and Types

These parameters are replaced by new parameters:

This parameter has stricter validation:

  • filter is no longer valid in a measure – you must use filters instead, one for each filter you want to specify

These parameters existed in old LookML but were undocumented:

These measure types just have one way to say them now:

  • In old LookML you could use avg or average but in new LookML you should use average
  • In old LookML you could use avg_distinct or average_distinct but in new LookML you should use average_distinct

View-level Parameters

This parameter is no longer needed in new LookML:

  • fields is no longer needed – just start defining individual dimension, measure, dimension_group, or filter parameters

This parameter was replaced:

  • sets parameter is no longer needed, just add individual set parameters

Explore-level and Join-level Parameters

This parameter is no longer needed in new LookML:

  • joins is no longer needed – just start defining individual join parameters

This parameter was replaced by a new parameter in new LookML:

This parameter was replaced by another parameter in old LookML so is not available in new LookML:

These parameters existed in old LookML but were undocumented:

Model-level Parameters

These parameters were replaced in new LookML:

This parameter has an additional use in new LookML:

  • includes is now also used when referring to an object defined in another file. For example, you now add an include in a view file when extending or referring to a field declared in another view file.

These parameters were deprecated in old LookML so are not available in new LookML:

Punctuation Differences

Here’s differences you’ll see but no worries – the IDE helps fill in the punctuation.

  • You don’t need to worry about indentation and hyphens anymore! You enclose a parameter’s sub-parameters by curly braces.
  • Use double semicolons (;:wink: after code blocks. You don’t need to use the pipe symbol ( | ) and you can use as many lines as you like.
  • All patterns that used to start with a field name now start with a parameter.
  • Whitespace no longer matters.

Value Differences

Here’s differences you’ll see but no worries – the IDE helps you get it right.

  • No more true or false – use yes and no.
  • Strings use doublequotes (") and are required in more places.
  • Almost everything is case-sensitive.

Related Info

For related info, check out these articles:


Legacy Feature Notice: Old Style YAML LookML (Looker 4.4+)
(brettg) #2

@tig - This is really helpful - For the parameters we are replacing with new syntax in the new lookML, are they all being handled by the converter?


(Tig Newman) #3

I’m glad @brettg.

And, yes, the converter takes care of these. You can see what the converter did for these situations by looking at the pages for the prior and replacement parameters. The converter was used to create the new LookML code blocks in documentation.


[Retired] Filtering Measures in LookML
(Tig Newman) #4

By the way, if you work with LookML dashboards you’ll notice that they still use old LookML. The LookML converter does not affect any LookML dashboards that you have in a project.


(Hui Zheng) #5

Thank you for this helpful articles. It clears a lot of confusions that I have when I compare old LookML with the new one.


(allegra) #6

Of course, @Hui_Zheng! Thanks for the feedback!