Fix the implementation of include in PortNamespace.absorb#120
Merged
Fix the implementation of include in PortNamespace.absorb#120
include in PortNamespace.absorb#120Conversation
sphuber
force-pushed
the
fix_119_expose_nested_include
branch
from
601e8e7 to
27e464e
Compare
giovannipizzi
previously approved these changes
Jun 26, 2019
sphuber
force-pushed
the
fix_119_expose_nested_include
branch
from
27e464e to
fd13d41
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
@giovannipizzi thanks for the review, but the solution was still broken, sorry for that. I had to rewrite and add more tests. It should be good now. |
sphuber
force-pushed
the
fix_119_expose_nested_include
branch
from
fd13d41 to
94ee960
Compare
The recent introduction of support for nested namespaces in the `exclude` and `include` rules of the `PortNamespace.absorb` method is incorrect when `include` rules are specified. The exclude and include rules need to be properly unwrapped to account for nesting, however, this needs to happen at different moments. For exclude rules, namespaces have to be done on the `leaf` level. As soon as the rule matches exactly the port name that is considered it should be filtered. With the include rules it works a little different. For rules representing nested ports, all the namespaces along the way to the leaf port *have* to be included as well.
sphuber
force-pushed
the
fix_119_expose_nested_include
branch
from
94ee960 to
dae8362
Compare
giovannipizzi
approved these changes
Jun 27, 2019
unkcpz
pushed a commit
to unkcpz/plumpy
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 14, 2024
…eam#120) The recent introduction of support for nested namespaces in the `exclude` and `include` rules of the `PortNamespace.absorb` method is incorrect when `include` rules are specified. The exclude and include rules need to be properly unwrapped to account for nesting, however, this needs to happen at different moments. For exclude rules, namespaces have to be done on the `leaf` level. As soon as the rule matches exactly the port name that is considered it should be filtered. With the include rules it works a little different. For rules representing nested ports, all the namespaces along the way to the leaf port *have* to be included as well.
agoscinski
pushed a commit
to agoscinski/plumpy
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 13, 2026
…eam#120) The recent introduction of support for nested namespaces in the `exclude` and `include` rules of the `PortNamespace.absorb` method is incorrect when `include` rules are specified. The exclude and include rules need to be properly unwrapped to account for nesting, however, this needs to happen at different moments. For exclude rules, namespaces have to be done on the `leaf` level. As soon as the rule matches exactly the port name that is considered it should be filtered. With the include rules it works a little different. For rules representing nested ports, all the namespaces along the way to the leaf port *have* to be included as well.
agoscinski
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 13, 2026
The recent introduction of support for nested namespaces in the `exclude` and `include` rules of the `PortNamespace.absorb` method is incorrect when `include` rules are specified. The exclude and include rules need to be properly unwrapped to account for nesting, however, this needs to happen at different moments. For exclude rules, namespaces have to be done on the `leaf` level. As soon as the rule matches exactly the port name that is considered it should be filtered. With the include rules it works a little different. For rules representing nested ports, all the namespaces along the way to the leaf port *have* to be included as well.
agoscinski
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 13, 2026
The recent introduction of support for nested namespaces in the `exclude` and `include` rules of the `PortNamespace.absorb` method is incorrect when `include` rules are specified. The exclude and include rules need to be properly unwrapped to account for nesting, however, this needs to happen at different moments. For exclude rules, namespaces have to be done on the `leaf` level. As soon as the rule matches exactly the port name that is considered it should be filtered. With the include rules it works a little different. For rules representing nested ports, all the namespaces along the way to the leaf port *have* to be included as well.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #119
Fix the implementation of
includeinPortNamespace.absorbThe recent introduction of support for nested namespaces in the
excludeandincluderules of thePortNamespace.absorbmethod isincorrect when
includerules are specified. The exclude and includerules need to be properly unwrapped to account for nesting, however,
this needs to happen at different moments. For exclude rules, namespaces
have to be done on the
leaflevel. As soon as the rule matches exactlythe port name that is considered it should be filtered.
With the include rules it works a little different. For rules
representing nested ports, all the namespaces along the way to the leaf
port have to be included as well.