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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Modifications of nT simulation context #602
Modifications of nT simulation context #602
Changes from 3 commits
3098880
d6b7f33
f96a1dc
18ae54f
270a059
ad50620
27863a1
c79b2fe
4f57731
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
[pep8] reported by reviewdog 🐶
WPS238 Found too many raises in a function: 4 > 3
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I cannot even mark it but would you mind to stick to python code guidlnes here. Which means no space before and after the equality sign in the function arguments.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This term is confusing to me. You are overwriting the cmt options which overwrite fax to keep the fax values? Would not it be easier in this case to simply not overwrite anything. I think you are changing the lineage here as you go from cmt_option_name to cmt_option_name_constant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
isn't it exactly the point? we track those parameters used for raw_record creation in lineage