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

Filter operators rebase #63

Merged

Conversation

fredludlow
Copy link
Contributor

Rebase of #49 on current master.

As previously commented, this is a bit of an experiment. It currently works well for me, but I'm very happy to play around with the syntax if anyone has suggestions for improvement,

@fredludlow
Copy link
Contributor Author

ps. Travis CI (triggered by pushing to my fork rather than creating the PR) failed for python 3.3 (the typing package not compatible).

If the intention is still to support python 3.3 (not relevant for me but maybe for others) then I think typing version 3.6.6 would support 3.3 https://pypi.org/project/typing/3.6.6/

@michaelbukachi
Copy link
Collaborator

ps. Travis CI (triggered by pushing to my fork rather than creating the PR) failed for python 3.3 (the typing package not compatible).

If the intention is still to support python 3.3 (not relevant for me but maybe for others) then I think typing version 3.6.6 would support 3.3 https://pypi.org/project/typing/3.6.6/

Python 3.3 reached it's end-of-line 3 years ago (https://endoflife.date/python). So I think we can stop supporting it.

@PrasanthChettri
Copy link
Contributor

@michaelbukachi will this be merged in the future ? seems useful

@michaelbukachi
Copy link
Collaborator

michaelbukachi commented Jun 6, 2021

Hi @PrasanthChettri yes, eventually. We are still trying to see if this is the best approach to handle or/and operators. If you have any ideas on how we should handle this, post them in #47 so that we can discuss it further.

@michaelbukachi
Copy link
Collaborator

@fredludlow One more thing. Is this PR a breaking change? Will users be able to still use filters the same they have been doing so before?

@fredludlow
Copy link
Contributor Author

My intention was that it wasn't going to break any existing behaviour (I added some new tests for the extended behaviour but the old tests should still all pass)

@michaelbukachi
Copy link
Collaborator

Awesome. Thanks.

@michaelbukachi michaelbukachi merged commit 7d7a090 into absent1706:master Aug 5, 2021
@michaelbukachi
Copy link
Collaborator

I'll do a release over the weekend.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants