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

NEW: add the __content__ pseudo-field, resolves #15 #16

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 31, 2023
Merged

Conversation

eigenein
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@eigenein eigenein added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request labels Mar 31, 2023
@eigenein eigenein self-assigned this Mar 31, 2023
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 31, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #16 (dd58ea3) into main (a671020) will increase coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

❗ Current head dd58ea3 differs from pull request most recent head 314b73a. Consider uploading reports for the commit 314b73a to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #16      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.37%   94.40%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files          29       29              
  Lines         675      679       +4     
  Branches       65       65              
==========================================
+ Hits          637      641       +4     
  Misses         32       32              
  Partials        6        6              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
combadge/support/http/aliases.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
combadge/support/httpx/backends/base.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

@@ -30,11 +31,16 @@ def __init__(self, client: _ClientT, *, raise_for_status: bool = True) -> None:

@classmethod
def _parse_response(cls, from_response: Response, to_type: Type[ResponseT]) -> ResponseT:
try:
json_fields = from_response.json()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wouldn't it be better to check the content-type response header instead of triggering a ValueError ?

Copy link
Member Author

@eigenein eigenein Mar 31, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks! #19

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants