-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 174
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
[ADD] progress: Decorator for progressbar #233
Open
pedrobaeza
wants to merge
2
commits into
OCA:master
Choose a base branch
from
Tecnativa:progressbar
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -3,4 +3,5 @@ coveralls | |
flake8 | ||
pep8-naming | ||
lxml<=4.3.4 | ||
progressbar2 | ||
psycopg2==2.7.3.1 |
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
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.
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.
record
->records
.I mean, should be work with one or many records. (if one record, it should be in an interable).
If not, it will not be possible to add / remove the decorator easely.
This could avoid the big diff, introduced here OCA/OpenUpgrade@3c4fc81
Do you think it's pertinent ?
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.
That can't be possible, Sylvain, as this needs to control each step of the loop for the progress bar. Think on this like
@api.one
decorator, in whichself
is only one record. You pass the whole recordset, but what gets to your method is only one. Here I took care of putting the proper nomenclature of the arguments for not confusing.The only way to get what you want is to intercept things into another level, like initially @ypapouin did in his PR #206, but that means that we need an specific decorator for each kind of operation (his one was for a fetchall), and lose the general purpose. We can override the iterator and create a wrapper, but this still is limited, as you can't have several nested loops, so it's not a lot of problem to change this. Now it seems a bit dirty as applied over a method that previously was not "progressified", but when writing new methods, there won't be diff and even the cyclomatic complexity will be lower, reducing one indentation level.
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.
Hi @pedrobaeza.
thanks for your answer.
In a first sight, I was thinking to replace
args_copy[index] = elem
byargs_copy[index] = [elem]
. It can do the job.dict.items() can not be used inside and should be replaced
)In the other hand,
I don't know ! I have mixed feelings on that point. Maybe other openupgrader will will have additional opinions.
Any way, not a blocking point. I think that introducing progressbar is a step in the right direction.
Note : not sure to have been convinced by the
@api.one
api. Most of the functions call in the first line, theself.ensure_one()
command, that is raising an error if a recordset with more than one item is provided.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 sincerely don't think passing a list of one element is the way to go. It's a bit antinatural and only for these cases where we adapt existing methods to reduce the diff, but it's less readable and put in doubt what the decorator does IMO.
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 is done in other places like
migrate(cr, version)
that gets converted tomigrate(env, version)
.