-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7.4k
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
Fix python datetime functions #3048
Conversation
Is it worth rewriting these tests in js and transpiling with the new general transpiller |
Yep, the ultimate goal is to unify the tests as well, one day... some day... )) These tests seem to mirror each other line-to-line, so I guess we will do something similar to what we did with precision tests. Feel free to do this or just let me know if you want me to unify them. |
@kroitor and what about my PR? |
@meold first of, thanks for the contribution. I'm watching the edits you make, good job so far! ) Now Travis says that it cannot divide the timestamp by a thousand in another method, where it previously could. This means that the new version of |
@meold I mean, https://travis-ci.org/ccxt/ccxt/builds/388410386#L1776 ← multiple occurrences of this:
|
@kroitor I'll do this, when I have time 0; Also I don't like this style of coding:
|
@kroitor by unifying the tests do you mean all the tests or just a subset. I don't think all tests need to be unified, for example testing the exchange API responses can be done in just one language - I think we only do it in python and js but correct me if I'm wrong. |
I mean a subset first, of course, but, will see how it goes, who knows... )) |
Ok, what would you propose instead of that line? |
@kroitor for example instead of:
It makes the code easier to read |
@kroitor fixed and now Travis is happy. |
No description provided.