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
Standardize locales and improve locale validation #954
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #954 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.74% 99.74%
=======================================
Files 10 10
Lines 1957 1964 +7
Branches 313 313
=======================================
+ Hits 1952 1959 +7
Misses 4 4
Partials 1 1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
@systemcatch @krisfremen do ya'll think I should change the variable that is referenced when we throw errors about locales? E.g. duplicate locale registered in a subclass or if a locale does not exist in a call to |
Since we are doing a bit of sanitizing anyway, I think what we have in the locales should be fine to return in the errors, it'll help to adopt the new codes also.
|
I agree with Kris, let's start returning the new codes in errors. |
|
Fixed @krisfremen @systemcatch! |
One more thought off the top of my head, but I'll have to double check this.
|
Look good to you @systemcatch? |
|
Yeah Jad looks good to merge. |
Pull Request Checklist
Thank you for taking the time to improve Arrow! Before submitting your pull request, please check all appropriate boxes:
toxormake testto find out!).tox -e lintormake lintto find out!).masterbranch.If you have any questions about your code changes or any of the points above, please submit your questions along with the pull request and we will try our best to help!
Description of Changes
Closes: #952