Skip to content
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

Dynamic removal of blocks #139

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jan 9, 2024
Merged

Dynamic removal of blocks #139

merged 4 commits into from
Jan 9, 2024

Conversation

DivadNojnarg
Copy link
Collaborator

Will fix one of the issue in #136, where the remove button is missing for dynamically added blocks.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 3, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: 16 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (cbb1b67) 60.73% compared to head (aa7f166) 80.75%.

Files Patch % Lines
R/server.R 27.27% 16 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #139       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   60.73%   80.75%   +20.02%     
===========================================
  Files          16       16               
  Lines        1663     1663               
===========================================
+ Hits         1010     1343      +333     
+ Misses        653      320      -333     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@DivadNojnarg
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@nbenn : unit tests will follow in another PR. I already have some of them in #119 and don't want to copy and paste here.

@DivadNojnarg DivadNojnarg marked this pull request as ready for review January 3, 2024 14:19
@DivadNojnarg DivadNojnarg requested a review from nbenn as a code owner January 3, 2024 14:19
@DivadNojnarg
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Note @nbenn: I can also make handle_remove_block an internal function instead of S3, if we assume people won't need to customise it, which is likely.

@nbenn
Copy link
Collaborator

nbenn commented Jan 5, 2024

Note @nbenn: I can also make handle_remove_block an internal function instead of S3, if we assume people won't need to customise it, which is likely.

@DivadNojnarg You could also not export the generic function itself I believe. The corresponding (class-specific) methods have to be exported, but as long as the generic is not, it should behave as "interal" function, despite using s3 dispatch.

Copy link
Collaborator

@nbenn nbenn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No objections from my side.

@DivadNojnarg
Copy link
Collaborator Author

DivadNojnarg commented Jan 5, 2024

Great @nbenn. I am done with this PR. This can go to main.

@DivadNojnarg DivadNojnarg requested review from nbenn and removed request for christophsax January 8, 2024 13:45
Copy link
Collaborator

@nbenn nbenn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Lgtm.

@DivadNojnarg DivadNojnarg merged commit 5d2cfcd into main Jan 9, 2024
7 of 8 checks passed
@DivadNojnarg DivadNojnarg deleted the 136-david-patch branch January 9, 2024 16:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants