Use default locale to get sign if none set for current locale #97
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
If current locale has no sign definition for a currency, fall back to using the DEFAULT locale to try to get the sign definition.
Tests were failing due to `pl_PL` now reverting to `DEFAULT` due to not having a sign definition set for USD.
|
This looks good to me. However, it is potentially backwards incompatible in terms of changing existing behaviour that people may have been relying on. I'd therefore like there to be a note in CHANGES.rst. Thanks! |
|
Added a note under the header for version 0.8, you might want to change that though if it isn't the intended release version. |
|
Thanks! |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
If current locale has no set sign definition for a currency, fall back to using the
DEFAULTlocale to try to get the sign definition. Should fix #96.It looks like #38 was opened for a similar issue but was eventually merged into a separate branch. Is this something that would be kept in a different branch or do you want this functionality in the master?