Skip to content

Conversation

@BrianHung
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@BrianHung BrianHung marked this pull request as draft July 30, 2025 08:35
@BrianHung BrianHung marked this pull request as ready for review August 1, 2025 09:54
@nhatcher
Copy link
Member

nhatcher commented Nov 6, 2025

Hi @BrianHung , it is really difficult to review such a large PR. I will try to:

  1. Rebase
  2. Write some smoke tests
  3. Fix important issues (but look pass minor things)
  4. Merge
  5. Thorough testing and bug fixing

@BrianHung
Copy link
Contributor Author

Will prioritize this over the weekend.

@nhatcher
Copy link
Member

nhatcher commented Nov 7, 2025

Hi @BrianHung , I have successfully rebased this branch and started writing the smoke tests as above.
Regrettably none of the smoke tests pass. Take, for instance, the example in the Excel documentation for ACCRINT.
Also, more importantly this PR changes way too many things. Some I like as it consolidates some functions some I don't, like changes to existing functions. I'm not particularly fond of things like:

if let Some(err) = validate_arg_count_or_return(arg_count, 5, 6, cell) {
      return err;
}

let params = match parse_required_params(args, &[0, 1, 2, 3, 4], self, cell, true) {
      Ok(p) => p,
      Err(err) => return err,
};

If we ever decide to do that we should do it system wide.
My new plan is redo everything myself function by function:

  • Get a few functions (ACCRINT and ACCRINTM) that I can group together
  • Create some smoke tests
  • Use your code to create implementation
  • Create a PR
  • Create issues for @elsaminsut to test and write documentation
  • Rinse and repeat

The only huge downside of this approach is that your name won't be in the committers history.
Let me know if you would like to discuss

@nhatcher
Copy link
Member

nhatcher commented Nov 7, 2025

See #518

@BrianHung
Copy link
Contributor Author

@nhatcher No worries; much rather have the functions exist and working than accreditation. LMK how I can help once you've figured out the plan of attack 😎

@BrianHung
Copy link
Contributor Author

Initially, when writing the implementations I did have them as separate PRs but then realized it might've been good to group them to avoid duplication in helper functions; that was the context of my changes.

@iamanaws
Copy link

iamanaws commented Nov 22, 2025

The only huge downside of this approach is that your name won't be in the committers history. Let me know if you would like to discuss

You could use Co-authored-by for attribution on the commits using Brian's code

Co-authored-by: BrianHung <[email protected]>

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.

3 participants