Fix getproperty calls on fields for File#1081
Merged
quinnj merged 3 commits intoJuliaData:mainfrom Apr 23, 2023
Merged
Conversation
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1081 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 90.22% 90.22%
=======================================
Files 9 9
Lines 2271 2271
=======================================
Hits 2049 2049
Misses 222 222
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
quinnj
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 12, 2026
* add test that fails * use getters for File field access * fix two missed spots using getproperty
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Solves #1080 and adds test for the original instance of the problem.
Would it be worth having a check on all field names? Feels like it is very easy to accidentally use the dot syntax internally when accessing the fields, and only when someone use data where the columns share the names something would be incorrect. Maybe more than only this constructor should be tested with columns using the field names of
File?