-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 205
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
LF : Fix/Clean some LF related TODOs #8387
Conversation
3f17232
to
fbca282
Compare
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.
Had a look at the navigator part, should we add a test for that?
navigator/backend/src/main/scala/com/digitalasset/navigator/query/project/package.scala
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...f/transaction/src/test/scala/com/digitalasset/daml/lf/transaction/TransactionCoderSpec.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
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.
Except for the navigator test, which I can't really judge, this looks good to me. If @stefanobaghino-da and @rautenrieth-da are happy with the changes there, let's merge. Thank you.
def twoDifferentVersions = | ||
for { | ||
v1 <- Gen.oneOf(postV10versions) | ||
v2 <- Gen.oneOf(postV10versions.filter(_ != v1)) |
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.
How about
v2 <- Gen.oneOf(postV10versions.filter(_ != v1)) | |
v2 <- Gen.oneOf(postV10versions.filter(_ > v1)) |
and remove the call to inIncreasingOrder
below? This seems to express the intent more clearly.
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.
Good idea.
# FixMe: https://github.com/digital-asset/daml/issues/2289 | ||
# change version to lf_latest_version when freezing numeric in the next language version | ||
target = lf_dev_version, | ||
target = lf_latest_version, |
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.
Numeric
is already in DAML-LF 1.8, isn't it? So, I guess we just missed this.
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.
Yes.
b436a1c
to
8236718
Compare
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.
Thanks for taking the time to add the Navigator tests!
CHANGELOG_BEGIN
CHANGELOG_END
Pull Request Checklist
CHANGELOG_BEGIN
andCHANGELOG_END
tagsNOTE: CI is not automatically run on non-members pull-requests for security
reasons. The reviewer will have to comment with
/AzurePipelines run
totrigger the build.