[dev] Fix issues when comparing text fields with None #21
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
rlessardrodeofx
commented
Nov 26, 2019
| @@ -613,7 +622,7 @@ def _compare(self, field_type, lval, operator, rval): | |||
| elif operator == "contains": | |||
| return rval in lval | |||
| elif operator == "not_contains": | |||
| return lval not in rval | |||
| return rval not in lval | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a behavior change, it seem the "not_contains" in mockgun just wasnt working right.
rlessardrodeofx
requested review from
elabrosseRodeofx,
JeanChristopheMorinRodeoFX,
RobinDeLillo and
swaugh-rodeo
|
Would you mind to add me as a reviewer ? |
|
@rlessardrodeofx We should push the Shotgun team to review the upstream PR. |
JeanChristopheMorinRodeoFX
approved these changes
Nov 26, 2019
elabrosseRodeofx
approved these changes
Nov 26, 2019
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 of the PR
This PR fix an issue introduced by #20 when comparing text field with None values. It also fix a bug with the "not_contains" operator.
After this is approved I will update our upstream PR (shotgunsoftware#217).
Overview of the changes
NonevaluesType of feedback wanted
Any kind of feedback.
Is there any cases I did not test? (Note that some operators have no test againts a None value as they crash with a normal shotgun instance, they are: "contains", "not_contains", "starts_with" and "ends_with")
Where should the reviewer start looking at?
Diff should be enough
Potential risks of this change
Some tests that where using mockgun could start failing (which in my case is what I want).
Relationship with other PRs
Continuation of the work in #20