Hello everyone,
It's 3 minutes to go, but I do not expect changes :).
Here are the voting results:
*[+1] Allow using asserts in some specific cases.* : 2 binding votes (Ash,
Jarek)
*[-1] Forbid using asserts.* : 6 binding votes (Kamil - yes Kamil you
have a binding vote :) , Tao, Felix, Kevi
-1 (non-binding).
I can see where you are coming from, but in my opinion checks in the
codebase should be used to direct runtime control flow. Otherwise I think
they belong in proper tests.
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 9:56 AM Jarek Potiuk
wrote:
> Here is a quick vote on using asserts in Airflow c
-1 (non-binding) This can cause too much confusion for new contributor.
On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 12:05 PM Ash Berlin-Taylor wrote:
> +1 (binding) as I've already said :)
>
> -ash
>
> > On 6 Dec 2019, at 00:55, Tao Feng wrote:
> >
> > -1 (binding)
> >
> > I share the same with most other comments.
+1 (binding) as I've already said :)
-ash
> On 6 Dec 2019, at 00:55, Tao Feng wrote:
>
> -1 (binding)
>
> I share the same with most other comments. And I personally prefer to use
> try,except to make it consistent across the code base while use assert in
> unit test .
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019
-1 (binding)
I share the same with most other comments. And I personally prefer to use
try,except to make it consistent across the code base while use assert in
unit test .
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 3:09 PM Felix Uellendall
wrote:
> -1 (binding)
>
> I agree. There shouldn’t be any confusion around
-1 (binding)
I agree. There shouldn’t be any confusion around this if we want to introduce
this. The old/current assertion style still looks more readable to me.
Felix
Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 23:35, Kevin Yang wrote:
> -1 (binding).
>
> People in the old thread has
-1 (binding).
People in the old thread has spoken for me. Specifically in Python, the
confusion introduced by using asserts IMO can defeat all the benefits
mentioned easily.
Kevin Y
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 8:27 AM Tomasz Urbaszek
wrote:
> -1 (non-binding)
>
> T.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 4:
-1 (non-binding)
T.
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 4:16 PM Deng Xiaodong wrote:
> -1 (binding).
>
> As shared earlier, the benefit it brings may not be enough to break even
> for me. And it’s not irreplaceable.
>
>
> XD
>
> > On 5 Dec 2019, at 11:10 PM, Kaxil Naik wrote:
> >
> > -1 (binding) it defin
-1 (binding).
As shared earlier, the benefit it brings may not be enough to break even for
me. And it’s not irreplaceable.
XD
> On 5 Dec 2019, at 11:10 PM, Kaxil Naik wrote:
>
> -1 (binding) it definitely seems to be a source of confusion and comparing
> it to the advantages it provides, I w
-1 (binding) it definitely seems to be a source of confusion and comparing
it to the advantages it provides, I would be hesitant on using it.
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 2:56 PM Jarek Potiuk
wrote:
> Here is a quick vote on using asserts in Airflow code.
>
> It is distilled from the discussion
> http
Here is a quick vote on using asserts in Airflow code.
It is distilled from the discussion
https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@airflow.apache.org.
Here are the two options:
*[+1]* Allow using asserts in some specific cases.*
*[-1]**: Forbid using asserts.*
The voting will last till Monday 4
11 matches
Mail list logo
