Draft PR to see diffs on func_args branch #51
Closed
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
|
It appears the only carry over from the rebase was the re-introduction of This will simplify the need for re-referencing issues as they have already been addressed (and linked to) in commits in |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The
func_argsbranch which was used to address #32 and #36 fell behindmainas other PRs were merged into it. Rebasingfunc_argsonto the head ofmainpresented quite a few conflicts (all of which I've resolved). I am drafting this PR to see what the diffs betweenfunc_argsandmainare after the rebase.This is just a way to check whether it is worth continuing to work on the
func_argsbranch or whether it's worth duplicating the changes on a new branch coming from the head ofmain(e.g.,func_args2).