Skip to content
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

feat(Base): rework speckle_type handling to better align with Core #245

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 5, 2023

Conversation

gjedlicska
Copy link
Collaborator

@gjedlicska gjedlicska commented Jan 4, 2023

use a dotnet FullName like behavior to deremine the speckle_type

fixes #231
fixes #221

Description & motivation

Changes:

To-do before merge:

Screenshots:

Validation of changes:

Checklist:

  • My pull request follows the guidelines in the Contributing guide?
  • My pull request does not duplicate any other open Pull Requests for the same update/change?
  • My commits are related to the pull request and do not amend unrelated code or documentation.
  • My code follows a similar style to existing code.
  • I have added appropriate tests.
  • I have updated or added relevant documentation.

References

use a dotnet `FullName` like behavior to deremine the speckle_type

fixes #231
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 4, 2023

Codecov Report

Base: 91.21% // Head: 91.24% // Increases project coverage by +0.03% 🎉

Coverage data is based on head (1cdd4ff) compared to base (5ae022d).
Patch coverage: 100.00% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #245      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   91.21%   91.24%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files          63       63              
  Lines        4312     4330      +18     
==========================================
+ Hits         3933     3951      +18     
  Misses        379      379              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
tests/test_traverse_value.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/specklepy/objects/base.py 83.33% <100.00%> (+1.08%) ⬆️
src/specklepy/objects/structural/__init__.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/specklepy/objects/structural/materials.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/specklepy/objects/structural/properties.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
tests/test_registering_base.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
tests/test_structural.py 70.49% <100.00%> (ø)

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.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@gjedlicska gjedlicska merged commit be9defb into main Jan 5, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Speckle type resolution doesn't match with SpeckleSharp/Core Objects are not registered in type registry
2 participants