Fix #774: Allow object methods to be used as extraction-keywords#1136
Open
embray wants to merge 1 commit intopython-babel:masterfrom
Open
Fix #774: Allow object methods to be used as extraction-keywords#1136embray wants to merge 1 commit intopython-babel:masterfrom
embray wants to merge 1 commit intopython-babel:masterfrom
Conversation
this is just a quick proof-of-concept; could also be done without adding more-itertools as a new dependency
Member
|
Thank you! Yeah, this makes sense, but we definitely don't want an extra dependency :) Maybe we can vendor (a subset of) |
Author
|
Great, given the go-ahead I'll rework this. peekable() is nice but I don't think it's really needed either. I like how your example pokes fun at the "Enterprise-y" nature of this ;). But I swear I had a really good use case for this and wanted to make it work. |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Proof of concept fix for #774. I did this quickly using
peekable()from the more-itertools package, but if adding a new dependency just for this is (understandably) undesirable, it could be fixed just as easily with slight improvements to the generate tokens loop (in fact I had a version of that working earlier, but it gets a bit hairier with the nested case).This would conflict with #1127, so if this is otherwise acceptable as a feature can rebase on top of that and without using more-itertools.