OPL-22: added services for Bill/BillItem, signal to save Bill created from calcrule #13
Conversation
|
I will add PR also for this https://github.com/openimis/openimis-be-calcrule-third_party_payment_py/tree/feature/OPL-22 when I write tests for calcrule converter (from Claims Queryset to Bill) etc. |
| return self._evaluate_generic_types(bill_data) | ||
|
|
||
| def bill_validate_items(self, bill: Bill): | ||
| # TODO: Implement after calculation rules available |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think when this 1st rule regarding creating Bill is ready, then we can implement this validation.
| pass | ||
|
|
||
| def bill_match_items(self, bill: Bill) \ | ||
| -> Dict[str, Union[BillItemStatus, Dict[BillItem, List[BillItemStatus]]]]: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's just a note, but Union is for X | Y. In docstring you're more specific; we're always returning ''subject' with BillItemStatus and 'line_items' with bill items and statuses. It'd might be better idea to use TypedDict for this hint so it'll match docstring information.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok. I will check this. Thx for this note.
invoice/signals.py
Outdated
| if instance.__class__.__name__ == "QuerySet": | ||
| queryset_model = instance.model | ||
| if queryset_model.__name__ == "Claim": | ||
| claim = instance.first() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it possible that query will return >1 entry? Maybe it'll be better to use .get() and raise exception if more than one entry is returned.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, Could be more than 1. But this is about to check if claim is in BillItem. I can explain this details what I intended to do tomorrow
Ok. Anyway I need to fix what Dragos mentioned to me on Skype. I will inform @dborowiecki you about this changes what I need to do. |
part of ticket: https://openimis.atlassian.net/browse/OPL-22
related to the repo (branch): https://github.com/openimis/openimis-be-calcrule-third_party_payment_py/tree/feature/OPL-22
Changes: