avoid recursive_replace() in block_creation.py
#16708
Merged
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
… It makes the code a bit more linear and avoids copying objects
arvidn
added
the
Changed
arvidn
commented
Nov 22, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Purpose:
It makes the code a bit more linear and avoids copying objects.
This is the only production use of
recursive_replace(), and with this it could be turned into a test-only facility.My long term intention is to make these types (
FullBlockand all its members, transitively) not be dataclasses, but instead native types. This poses a challenge with all the places we usereplace().recursive_replace()is especially challenging to substitute.This is a small step towards reducing the use of
replace(). One possibility might be to have these objects be mutable, to cover some of the existing use ofreplace(), but not all.