-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
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
ENH: Add require argument to load() to accept version specifiers #48
Merged
stefanv
merged 9 commits into
scientific-python:main
from
effigies:enh/load_requirement
Jan 30, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
ea7eced
ENH: Implement load_requirement
effigies da8154d
RF: Rewrite load_requirement as argument to load, add have_module() f…
effigies 94e6465
TEST: Test load(..., require=...) keyword arg and have_module() func
effigies add4bfe
ENH: Delay loading of less likely modules
effigies bba2603
RF: Split requirement check into function, prefer importlib.metadata
effigies a557fb4
Remove have_module (out-of-scope)
effigies ba248f9
DOC: Update docstring and README
effigies 1788203
DOC: Note discrepancy between distribution and import names
effigies 15a1d1a
Update README.md
effigies File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you want a default message? Like the old value: f"No module named '{fd['spec']}'\n\n""?
Also, why is message after *args in the function sig instead of before? For backward compat?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I found it was easier to be more explicit about setting the message in the branching logic. I can rework with a default, if preferred.
I figured keyword-only would be clearer, but I'm okay with any signature. Let me know if you'd like me to change this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I see what you mean and agree that dealing with the message is better handled in the branching logic.