Rename _separate to forward_wav #337
Merged
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
mpariente
commented
Nov 19, 2020
asteroid/models/base_models.py
Outdated
Comment on lines
179
to
181
| if is_overridden("_separate", self, parent=BaseModel): | ||
| return self._separate(wav, *args, **kwargs) | ||
| return self(wav, *args, **kwargs) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, maybe the is_overriden is completely overkill..
Removing _separate from the base class and hasattr(self,"_separate") + raise warning if it does would have been enough.
Hahah, I happy to write that function anyway 😅
|
This is ready IMO. |
jonashaag
reviewed
Nov 25, 2020
|
See comments, otherwise LGTM |
|
/rebase |
Co-authored-by: Jonas Haag <jonas@lophus.org>
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Proposition: rename
_separatetoforward_wavinBaseModel.This is something that was a bit discussed in #305 : asking users to overwrite a private method doesn't feel right. This fixes it.
Possibly in conflict with #305