Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

refactor swait record support like calcout #240

Closed
prjemian opened this issue Aug 30, 2019 · 1 comment · Fixed by #244
Closed

refactor swait record support like calcout #240

prjemian opened this issue Aug 30, 2019 · 1 comment · Fixed by #244
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@prjemian
Copy link
Contributor

New support for the calcout record defines the fields with more descriptive names than current swaitRecord support. And the new support also uses a superclass for fields common to all record types. Time to refactor the swait record support to be consistent.

One aspect that will be improved is swait.channels.A.value.value will be replaced with something like swait.channels.A.input_value.value.

@prjemian prjemian added this to the 1.1.14 milestone Aug 30, 2019
@prjemian prjemian self-assigned this Aug 30, 2019
@prjemian
Copy link
Contributor Author

prjemian commented Aug 30, 2019

API change? Bump major version number?

Note that since this change will break the current API for the swait record, should the major version number be incremented? This is not a major change for the apstools package, just this one smaller part of it. Just increment the patch number instead, as planned.

prjemian added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 2, 2019
prjemian added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 2, 2019
prjemian added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 2, 2019
prjemian added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 2, 2019
prjemian added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 2, 2019
prjemian added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 2, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant