refactor: proper class for field info #1730
Draft
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
Test passes, surprisingly. No special effort has been made to support `header_case` option, or "required" columns with `schema_sync`
pierrecamilleri
force-pushed
the
refactor/field_info
branch
from
996f64d to
8b72ae8
Compare
pierrecamilleri
changed the base branch from
main
to
fix/parallel-datapackage
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This is a refactoring PR.
Currently, a complex private object
field_infois created in "Table.__open_row_stream" (resources/table.py) and used in the (non-public) Row__init__method.This PR introduces the FieldsInfo class that holds the same information but with types and a proper interface.
Next steps / investigation:
create_cell_readerfunction, instead of a more directread_cell, which at first glance would simplify the logic.create_cell_reader(maybe to reuse thevalue_reader). This does not seem the right place.value_readeronce and for all (but same question, why create avalue_readerinstead of aread_rowmethod.schema_sync=True, instead, create a separate list or mapping of the actual data fields.