Support replacing params and providers #90
Conversation
| pl.insert(func) | ||
| pl[int] = 1 | ||
| assert pl.compute(int) == 1 | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| def test_setitem_can_replace_instance() -> None: | |
| pl = sl.Pipeline() | |
| original_number = 1 | |
| pl[int] = original_number | |
| assert pl.compute(int) is original_number | |
| new_number = 1 | |
| pl[int] = new_number | |
| assert pl.compute(int) == original_number | |
| assert pl.compute(int) is not original_number | |
| assert pl.compute(int) is new_number | |
Can we also have a test case that shows instance check like this...?
Just to show that it's passed by lambda function, so the instance is kept not just the value.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
int is immutable, not sure I see the value of such a test?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, but it shows that it doesn't copy the value and return it but keep the instance itself.
In case we want to pass around dict, it might be useful information I thought...?
I just suggested what I wanted to try with the changes.
Feel free to drop them...!
| pl[A[T]] = A[T](1) # type: ignore[valid-type] | ||
| assert pl.compute(A[int]) == A[int](1) | ||
| pl[A[T]] = A[T](2) # type: ignore[valid-type] | ||
| assert pl.compute(A[int]) == A[int](2) | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| def test_setitem_replace_generic_param_not_prioritized() -> None: | |
| T = TypeVar('T') | |
| @dataclass | |
| class A(Generic[T]): | |
| value: T | |
| pl = sl.Pipeline(params={A[int]: 1}) | |
| pl[A[T]] = A[T](0.1) # type: ignore[valid-type] | |
| assert pl.compute(A[int]) == A[int](1) | |
| assert pl.compute(A[float]) == A[float](0.1) | |
Maybe it's worth show/check that the inserted generic provider doesn't overwrite or be prioritized to the explicit one...?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is unrelated to this change, I think? There are already tests for specializations.
Fixes #57