-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 226
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
Feature/short bom names #121
Merged
Merged
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
9c654ba
Changed part number fields to use shorter names
Tyler-Ward aed7771
Update Tutorial 08
Tyler-Ward b97e0ea
Merge manufacturer name and manufacturer part number fields in diagram
Tyler-Ward e78ce4b
Swap manufacturer info field function for cleaner implementation
Tyler-Ward 1f94298
Swap order of part number fields in generated bom
Tyler-Ward 89bd88d
Swaped internal and public bom field names to the shorter names.
Tyler-Ward File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How about this?
It should return the same four options:
None
(nothing specified){manufacturer}
(no MPN specified)MPN: {mpn}
(no manufacturer specified){manufacturer}: {mpn}
(both specified)IMHO a bit cleaner and easier to understand.
The
str()
functions allows using+
to concatenate strings without errors ifmpn
is passed as anint
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@formatc1702 How about this alternative instead?
Edit: It's closer to the original, except without a variable and without parentheses around the return expressions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That looks like a much tider way to implement that, have swapped to that implementation in the latest commits