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
Unify recursive update on ReplacementPane #4958
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4958 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 83.49% 73.44% -10.05%
===========================================
Files 270 271 +1
Lines 38239 38281 +42
===========================================
- Hits 31926 28116 -3810
- Misses 6313 10165 +3852
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
... and 57 files with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
_is_equal
in ReplacementPane888f7ad
to
51e6a30
Compare
I think it would be beneficial to have Maybe even have a |
My thinking was that in most cases the cost is neglible but in the case of a dataframe, where the cost does potentially matter significantly, simple equality won't, so you end up paying the cost twice. |
My thinking was that in most cases the cost is neglible but in the case of a dataframe where the cost does potentially matter significantly equal won't work anyway so you end up paying the cost twice. The .all() could help with that. Not sure I prefer it though. |
My thought was that we should not penalize every other type because Arrays and DataFrames are ambiguous with more than one element. The |
Fair points, swapped the order. |
Fixes #4951
Fixes #4968