Skip to content
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

Updated Inclusive to accept description as well #364

Merged

Conversation

svisser
Copy link
Collaborator

@svisser svisser commented Oct 4, 2018

This makes the implementation consistent with Exclusive which is also a subclass of Optional and which also accepts description.

I think this might've been missed in the past but it seems logical to accept description for both.

I noticed this after looking at the documentation mentioned in #363.

This makes the implementation consistent with Exclusive which is also a subclass of Optional and which also accepts description
@svisser svisser self-assigned this Oct 4, 2018
@svisser svisser requested a review from alecthomas October 4, 2018 11:24
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 95.349% when pulling 360d50a on svisser:feature/inclusive_description into e72fd3b on alecthomas:master.

@alecthomas alecthomas merged commit 2e68114 into alecthomas:master Oct 5, 2018
@alecthomas
Copy link
Owner

Good thinking!

@svisser svisser deleted the feature/inclusive_description branch October 5, 2018 13:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants