Fix ref key #97
Merged
Fix ref key #97
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
pszulczewski
requested review from
chadell,
lvrfrc87,
scetron and
jeffkala
as code owners
pszulczewski
commented
Apr 18, 2023
| splitted_jmespath = splitted_jmespath[: number + 1] | ||
| splitted_jmespath = splitted_jmespath[:number] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here is the change to fix it.
Other changes are just $$ moved right and tests have been reordered to follow the pattern:
-> define test cases params
-> wrap above test cases into a list
-> test function for the wrapped list with test cases.
plus one additional test case keyref_parser_case_5
pszulczewski
force-pushed
the
fix_ref_key
branch
from
a995f27 to
b969d0f
Compare
jeffkala
approved these changes
Apr 19, 2023
|
looks good |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 fixes the ref_key to pin it to the exact key, as mentioned in #92 conversation.