hotfix invoking the Node tags method

[haoxins]

Sorry for introducing this in #302

What type of PR is this?

• bug
• feature
• enhancement

What problem(s) does this PR solve?

Issue(s) number:

Description:

How do you solve it?

Special notes for your reviewer, ex. impact of this fix, design document, etc:

[haoxins]

BTW, it seems that we don't use @property annotation in this package?
I prefer the way of using @property.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (91afe1b) 77.83% compared to head (e0e974a) 77.84%.

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #317   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   77.83%   77.84%           
=======================================
  Files          18       18           
  Lines        2423     2424    +1     
=======================================
+ Hits         1886     1887    +1     
  Misses        537      537           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[wey-gu]

Thanks!
We may add test cases to cover it later :)

[wey-gu]

BTW, it seems that we don't use @property annotation in this package?

I prefer the way of using @property.

Yes, this project was not initiated by pythonista, let's polish it together, feel free to drop PR on doing so!

[haoxins]

BTW, it seems that we don't use @property annotation in this package?
I prefer the way of using @property.

Yes, this project was not initiated by pythonista, let's polish it together, feel free to drop PR on doing so!

done

[wey-gu]

Sorry, after revisiting for a while, I think it's better not change .tags from a function into a @property.

• It's an API break change
• Relationship.edge_name and a bunch of other functions are in similar situations, we should either change them all or left all unchanged to maintain consistency of the design

My suggestions would be:

• leave those getter functions function(without @property)
• optionally introduce _foo @Property like Node._tags, Relationship._edge_name etc.
• Use @property for getters in next major version(that such break change is accepted) and to avoid breaking our user code.

What do you think @haoxins , please?

[haoxins]

Sorry, after revisiting for a while, I think it's better not change .tags from a function into a @property.

• It's an API break change
• Relationship.edge_name and a bunch of other functions are in similar situations, we should either change or left unchanged to maintain consistency of the design

My suggestions would be:

• leave those getter functions function(without @property)
• optionally introduce _foo @Property like Node._tags, Relationship._edge_name etc.
• Use @property for getters in next major version(that such break change is accepted) and to avoid breaking our user code.

What do you think @haoxins , please?

I had the same concerns before I pushed the commit.

I will just revert the commit for this PR

---

I want to do more naming changes in the future, will give a list in a Github issue.

[haoxins]

Use @Property for getters in next major version(that such break change is accepted) and to avoid breaking our user code.

Yes, this project was not initiated by pythonista, let's polish it together, feel free to drop PR on doing so!

I think we can start a Github issue to track the changes that make this package more Pythonic.

[wey-gu]

Use @Property for getters in next major version(that such break change is accepted) and to avoid breaking our user code.

Yes, this project was not initiated by pythonista, let's polish it together, feel free to drop PR on doing so!

I think we can start a Github issue to track the changes that make this package more Pythonic.

Yes, let's do it!!!

[wey-gu]

Sorry, after revisiting for a while, I think it's better not change .tags from a function into a @property.

• It's an API break change
• Relationship.edge_name and a bunch of other functions are in similar situations, we should either change or left unchanged to maintain consistency of the design

My suggestions would be:

• leave those getter functions function(without @property)
• optionally introduce _foo @Property like Node._tags, Relationship._edge_name etc.
• Use @property for getters in next major version(that such break change is accepted) and to avoid breaking our user code.

What do you think @haoxins , please?

I had the same concerns before I pushed the commit.

I will just revert the commit for this PR

I want to do more naming changes in the future, will give a list in a Github issue.

Please drop the main list issue as RFC ♥️.

[haoxins]

cc @Nicole00

[haoxins]

@Nicole00 take a look?