Fix Operator.eval() in case output pin 0 is not named "fields_container" #1527
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
Signed-off-by: paul.profizi <paul.profizi@ansys.com>
rafacanton
reviewed
Apr 23, 2024
PProfizi
commented
Apr 23, 2024
rafacanton
approved these changes
Apr 23, 2024
cbellot000
approved these changes
Apr 23, 2024
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I have stumbled upon operators where the output pin 0, despite being of type
fields_container, is not namedfields_container.That is an implicit rule we generally follow, not a hard one we can expect everyone to follow.
The
eval()method should thus be made more generic.It still tests for a
fields_containertype output pin, but it does not put any requirement on the naming.