added modes and Fill mode

[kurtbrose]

short and sweet!

this gives a way to construct a tuple that I've wanted forever, but does it in a much more generic fashion!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #110 into master will increase coverage by 0.07%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #110      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   95.76%   95.84%   +0.07%     
==========================================
  Files          18       19       +1     
  Lines        2079     2117      +38     
  Branches      305      313       +8     
==========================================
+ Hits         1991     2029      +38     
  Misses         49       49              
  Partials       39       39

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
glom/__init__.py	100% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
glom/core.py	96.72% <100%> (+0.13%)	⬆️
glom/test/test_fill.py	100% <100%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 0e9c98f...a4162a0. Read the comment docs.

[mahmoud]

Hmm, so I was thinking I'd fix some tests, but I'm not sure I understand this one: assert glom('a', 1) == 1. It's not a Template() so we get build mode which in CI gives: TypeError: expected spec to be dict, list, tuple, callable, string, or other Spec-like type, not: 1

[kurtbrose]

oh yea, just noticed + fixed -- forgot to do Template(1) -- it is basically getting the static code path

[kurtbrose]

other name ideas (instead of Template):

Stencil, Fill, Raw, Values

(Fill is the front-runner right now)

reasons not to stay with template: it is long, and a lot of other systems use the word tempalte

[mahmoud]

Definitely thinking fill mode and Fill() spec. Method could be out or just fill.