-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
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
v0.6.2 #822
Merged
v0.6.2 #822
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
ebfe95e
prepare 0.6.2
CagtayFabry 2758a00
fix mypy
CagtayFabry 3809090
update CITATION.cff
CagtayFabry b773f6d
add toml dep in isort pre-commit
CagtayFabry 3535791
deepsource
CagtayFabry dc0a194
remove UGroove label
CagtayFabry 5824161
change internal link names
CagtayFabry f13a0bc
remove links
CagtayFabry 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@ | ||
# YAML 1.2 | ||
--- | ||
title: weldx | ||
version: 0.6.1 | ||
date-released: 2022-05-19 | ||
version: 0.6.2 | ||
date-released: 2022-11-07 | ||
authors: | ||
- affiliation: "Bundesanstalt für Materialforschung und -prüfung (BAM)" | ||
email: [email protected] | ||
|
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
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.
are there any performance implications for this change? This will trigger equality comparisons for set and dict operations.
I've seen deepsource complaining about this. But can't we redirect the hash function to XArray (if they offer one)?
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.
Actually, mutable objects shouldn't be hashable at all. But there is a feature request for XArray to implement this any ways. pydata/xarray#4738
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.
the way I see it this should have been the implicit behavior anyway (because we implement
__eq__
) but somehow deepsource didn't pick it upThere 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 think if the equality operator is defined, and the hash method is just being derived, the object will still be hashable. So this is not just a cosmetic change to satisfy a linter.
Prior 0.6.2 this raised:
TypeError: __hash__ method should return an integer