Fix applyfield when applied to non-existent fields #63
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
`applyfield` was inconsistent with `applyfield!` in that it threw an error on non-existent fields rather than return `false`, which the docuementation _said_ it did. This fixes `applyfield` to ignore non-existent fieldnames and return `false`. Alternative fix to adding teh `ignoreextras` function proposed in #52.
Closed
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #63 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 69.36% 72.83% +3.46%
==========================================
Files 1 1
Lines 333 346 +13
==========================================
+ Hits 231 252 +21
+ Misses 102 94 -8
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
applyfieldwas inconsistent withapplyfield!in that it threw anerror on non-existent fields rather than return
false, which thedocuementation said it did. This fixes
applyfieldto ignorenon-existent fieldnames and return
false. Alternative fix to addingteh
ignoreextrasfunction proposed in #52.