Skip to content
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

Go: set subtypes column to true for all models (except in some tests) #17966

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

owen-mc
Copy link
Contributor

@owen-mc owen-mc commented Nov 12, 2024

This is almost always the behaviour that we want. I will do a QA run to see what alert changes this leads to.

@smowton
Copy link
Contributor

smowton commented Nov 12, 2024

I'd say we might as well leave this set to False where we're modelling a function, not a method, if only to avoid confusing a reader wondering what a "subtype" means in that context

@owen-mc
Copy link
Contributor Author

owen-mc commented Nov 12, 2024

I was thinking it was easier to have the convention that we always set it to True unless there was a very good reason to, so we don't have to think about what is a function and what is a method. Admittedly it's pretty obvious from whether the "type" column is empty or not, but I still think some people will set it to False for methods by mistake at some point if we mix True and False.

@owen-mc
Copy link
Contributor Author

owen-mc commented Nov 13, 2024

QA showed 3 extra alerts. I was able to reproduce one locally and it was a valid result. I wasn't able to reproduce the other two locally. I don't think it's worth chasing it down too much - the small number of extra alerts reassures me that this PR is okay to merge.

@mbg
Copy link
Member

mbg commented Nov 14, 2024

Regarding the discussion about what to set this to for functions, my view is:

  • Ideally, there would be no subtype column at all for models where that has no meaning or doesn't make sense. As is the case for functions here.
  • But since MaD doesn't allow that kind of distinction (AFAIK), it may be easier to have a non-boolean value here that indicates that it's not applicable (e.g. unused or the empty string).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants