-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 74
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
Validate range #725
Validate range #725
Conversation
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.
Thanks @minimav for this well appreciated PR! I have left one inline comment, otherwise it looks good, and I am very pleased that you made the effort to add some tests 👍
Thanks @maximlt, I have been a little busy and didn't manage to make the change you suggested. |
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.
Looks great, thanks!!
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.
Looks good, let's get this merged!
Yep let me have a last look and merge after that. |
Thanks a lot for your contribution @minimav ! This fix is going to be included in the release of Param 2.0. |
This implements the validation on the
Range
param suggested in #698. I tried to match what I could see in other params which had such logic already. A couple of minor things:'q's
in the order error message for a named param was a compromise since%r's
results in'q''s
which looks a bit awkward.Range bounds...
when validating the bounds rather thanRange parameter ...
for both bounds and the param value.Fixes #698