1578 remove active episode #1594
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
… on the front end rather than rely on a serialised property from the server
fredkingham
reviewed
Oct 4, 2018
| _.values(patient.episodes), | ||
| function(x){ return x.active == true } | ||
| ); | ||
| if(active_ids.length > 0){ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
bike shedding but active_ids.length is enough
…ightly more succinct
…care/opal into 1578-remove-active-episode-id
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Serialising a value for
Patient.to_dict()['active_episode_id']hasn't made sense since we accepted that there will be multiple concurrent episodes as a common occurrence.Picking the first episode id from
self.episode_set.filter(active=True).order_by('id').reverse()is if anything confusing, as it implies that there is some special status to that episode - which there is not.This PR removes the concept of Patient.active_episode_id and refactors the HospitalNumberCtrl to (the only place that really used it) replicate the behaviour itself.
The behaviour of HospitalNumberCtrl is frankly suspect anyway, but it leaves this PR no more suspect than before it.
Note that we probably want to merge #1590 before this, as Copy To Category also uses active_episode_id.
refs #1578