Closed Peque closed 6 years ago
Merging #286 into master will not change coverage. The diff coverage is
100%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #286 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.15% 99.15%
=======================================
Files 26 26
Lines 3550 3550
Branches 256 256
=======================================
Hits 3520 3520
Misses 18 18
Partials 12 12
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
...ain/tests/test_agent_sync_publications_handlers.py | 98.27% <ø> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
osbrain/tests/test_agent.py | 100% <ø> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
osbrain/tests/test_agent_sync_publications.py | 100% <ø> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
...sbrain/tests/test_agent_async_requests_handlers.py | 96% <ø> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
osbrain/agent.py | 97.71% <ø> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
osbrain/nameserver.py | 99.21% <100%> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
osbrain/tests/test_proxy.py | 100% <100%> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update ad5e4e2...7377fa6. Read the comment docs.
I'm guessing this is some sort of standard? Or is it just because you thought it looks better?
Yeah, PEP8 recommends PEP257 for docstrings, wich recommends triple double quotes. This is also what we were using (almost) everywhere.
For string quotes I do not know if there is an official recommendation. I think the recommendation is to simply stick to one or another, for consistency. As you can see we were already using single string quotes (almost) everywhere. I also think this is the de facto standard and most common approach.
Basically: we keep using the same style that we were using before, but we make it "a must". We also stick to the recommendations and more common approaches.
Found this and thought... why not? :joy: