Implemented solution to issue #441 and added test cases #461
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
…py still behaves as expected
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
vishutupili
changed the title
vishutupili
changed the title
| i >= 0 | ||
| and hookimpls[i].tryfirst | ||
| and not (hookimpls[i].hookwrapper or hookimpls[i].wrapper) | ||
| while i >= 0 and ( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@RonnyPfannschmidt not sure I get your point here. Do you mean that additional tests should be implemented in this PR to cover another situation ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No,what I meant is that based on the preceding code, the desired feature was intentionally unsupported and we need to do some design work to ensure its supported correctly instead of just enabling it
|
Hi @vishutupili, the tests you added are passing also in current main. Can you add some tests the fail before the change and pass after? |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR is addressing issue #441
We have implemented the suggested change to the while loop condition.
Additionally, we have added test cases to test the order of hooks called to make sure that changing the while loop condition did not change the correct behaviour that the previous code was producing (specifically when hookwrapper and wrapper are set to False).