-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 56
Read files directly #243
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
Read files directly #243
Conversation
Thanks! Could you also update the type generation uses of JSON.read to no longer do the file checks? Seems like it shouldn't be necessary anymore with this change. |
Sorry for the add on, but could you also add a test for this? |
Codecov ReportBase: 88.36% // Head: 88.37% // Increases project coverage by
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #243 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 88.36% 88.37%
=======================================
Files 9 9
Lines 1728 1729 +1
=======================================
+ Hits 1527 1528 +1
Misses 201 201
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
Good thing you asked for some test cases, it wasn't behaving as expected when reading types |
Any chance we can get this merged? |
json = read_json_str(json_str) | ||
|
||
# build a type for the JSON | ||
json = read(json_str) |
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.
wait, why are we not using read_json_str
here anymore?
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.
read
now does what read_json_str
did, so it's redundant
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.
ah got it.
@mcmcgrath13 does this look good to you? I think it LGTM |
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.
LGTM - Thank you!
No description provided.