-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31
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
Tuple unpacking bug fix in cut finder. #591
Conversation
@@ -430,12 +430,12 @@ def add_action( | |||
self, | |||
action_obj: DisjointSearchAction, | |||
gate_spec: GateSpec, | |||
args: tuple | None = None, | |||
*args: tuple | None, |
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.
I suspect that | None
is not actually needed. See e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/a/37032111/1558890
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.
I wasn't able to look into this carefully but since mypy
didn't complain, I went ahead and made the change you suggested (e44b4be).
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, thanks
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9099874576Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.
Details
💛 - Coveralls |
* tuple unpacking bug fix, edit tests and type hints accordingly. * remove extraneous type hint (cherry picked from commit 9d789f7)
* tuple unpacking bug fix, edit tests and type hints accordingly. * remove extraneous type hint (cherry picked from commit 9d789f7) Co-authored-by: Ibrahim Shehzad <[email protected]>
There was a tuple unpacking error that arose when the
CutBothWires
action was invoked as part of the rest of the cut finding workflow. This bug was not noticed at first because the although existing tests called that line, its output was not used in any part of the rest of the workflow. This bug was noticed in the work leading up to #586 which will also add more comprehensive tests for theCutBothWires
action. The goal of this PR is just to fix this bug and edit the corresponding tests and type hints accordingly.