You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Thanks for posting, Sam. It makes more sense to me for the delete to check the value. I don't think someone who used merge_get_part alone would expect an empty iterable in the null case, and I wouldn't want to change the behavior of one func to suit another. It's then a question of whether or not to flip return_empties - and I think it's more computation if we're running null deletes for each part. I might adjust delete to the following
delete
function here it iterates of each part table with matching entries.Merge.merge_get_part()
returnNone
if there are no matching parts. This is non-iterable and causes an errorSolution:
Either:
Merge.merge_get_part()
before iterating hereMerge.merge_get_part()
for an empty case@CBroz1, do you have any known reason to prefer either option?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: