Use opearator functions instead of our own where possible #106
Conversation
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Today I learned that Python comes with the operator module. This provides various operators as functions, which made me think of
db/filters.py, where we define several functions again likeexact, which is equal tooperator.eq.This PR reduces possible errors and maintenance for us by replacing our functions with those from
operator. Please note that more might be possible; there is e.g.operator.contains, but it's not a drop-in replacement forin_(I tried, some tests failed) and I didn't want to spend too much time on this, so for now, it's not included here.