-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 43
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
Refactor grouped queries in CgmesModel #3238
Draft
rcourtier
wants to merge
7
commits into
use_endnumber_for_powertransformerend_numbering
Choose a base branch
from
refactor_cgmesmodel_grouped_queries
base: use_endnumber_for_powertransformerend_numbering
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Draft
Refactor grouped queries in CgmesModel #3238
rcourtier
wants to merge
7
commits into
use_endnumber_for_powertransformerend_numbering
from
refactor_cgmesmodel_grouped_queries
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
rcourtier
force-pushed
the
refactor_cgmesmodel_grouped_queries
branch
from
December 2, 2024 15:22
ea68a93
to
860acf3
Compare
rcourtier
force-pushed
the
refactor_cgmesmodel_grouped_queries
branch
from
December 9, 2024 09:21
80d5838
to
d7f5aed
Compare
rcourtier
force-pushed
the
use_endnumber_for_powertransformerend_numbering
branch
from
December 9, 2024 09:23
4e1fd3d
to
f680d6a
Compare
Signed-off-by: Romain Courtier <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Romain Courtier <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Romain Courtier <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Romain Courtier <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Romain Courtier <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Romain Courtier <[email protected]>
rcourtier
force-pushed
the
refactor_cgmesmodel_grouped_queries
branch
from
December 9, 2024 09:24
d7f5aed
to
b4c9a64
Compare
…lisions with queries methods Signed-off-by: Romain Courtier <[email protected]>
Quality Gate passedIssues Measures |
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.
Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements
Does this PR already have an issue describing the problem?
No.
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Refactoring.
What is the current behavior?
There is a lack of consistency in the methods of CgmesModel that fetch data based on a common object ID. The methods don't have a similar naming, nor do they have a similar signature, and nor are they implemented in the same way and in the same class.
For instance:
What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
Grouped queries now are implemented in a more consistent way, with a similar naming, a similar signature and a similar implementation in AbstractCgmesModel with final caches.
Does this PR introduce a breaking change or deprecate an API?
If yes, please check if the following requirements are fulfilled
What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR? (migration steps)
Other information: