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

Re-applied fixes from testing datadoc on a use case for PINK. #285

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Jan 8, 2025

Conversation

jesper-friis
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Re-applied fixes from testing datadoc on a use case for PINK.

Type of change

  • Bug fix and code cleanup
  • New feature
  • Documentation update
  • Testing

Checklist for the reviewer

This checklist should be used as a help for the reviewer.

  • Is the change limited to one issue?
  • Does this PR close the issue?
  • Is the code easy to read and understand?
  • Do all new feature have an accompanying new test?
  • Has the documentation been updated as necessary?
  • Is the code properly tested?

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 6, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 70.00000% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 76.72%. Comparing base (33f1495) to head (4bad7b0).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
tripper/dataset/datadoc.py 0.00% 3 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #285      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   76.68%   76.72%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files          22       22              
  Lines        2415     2415              
==========================================
+ Hits         1852     1853       +1     
+ Misses        563      562       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There is an extra ´with´ in line 51

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

line 301: an --> can

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lien 305: options --> option

@francescalb
Copy link
Contributor

Just a few typo-comments above.

However, I find the order og arguments to datadoc to be a bit unintuitive. Wouldn't it be better to have
datadoc find/add/load and the non-positional arguments?

jesper-friis and others added 2 commits January 7, 2025 17:34
Co-authored-by: Francesca L. Bleken <48128015+francescalb@users.noreply.github.com>
@jesper-friis
Copy link
Contributor Author

jesper-friis commented Jan 7, 2025

However, I find the order og arguments to datadoc to be a bit unintuitive. Wouldn't it be better to have datadoc find/add/load and the non-positional arguments?

I do not disagree, but don't know how to improve. datadoc is using argparse sub-commands the standard way. The behaviour should be similar to git. Both for datadoc and git is the general syntax git [GENERAL_OPTIONS...] subcommand [SUBCOMMAND_OPTIONS...]. The only difference is that you seldom use the general options with git (since with git, all connection configurations are inferred from the working dir). But git --git-dir=a.git --work-tree=b -C c status --short is a possible and valid git command.

Or are you thinking about that the help for the add and load sub-commands lists the positional arguments before the options? That is just the choice of how argparse shows its help output. The order of options and positional arguments for the sub-commands are interchangeable.

@jesper-friis jesper-friis enabled auto-merge (squash) January 8, 2025 12:50
@jesper-friis jesper-friis merged commit 624351a into master Jan 8, 2025
20 of 21 checks passed
@jesper-friis jesper-friis deleted the datadoc-fixes3 branch January 8, 2025 12:56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants