-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 27
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
Introduce an optional parameter to use non-default padding #133
Conversation
…o version class to indicate J2602 status.
Add support for protocol version J2602_1_1.0
Mark unit tests
Introduce class J2602Version
… W503 are conflicting rules.
Fix flake8 linter errors.
Fix issue with decode/encode signals of list type
Bump version number
Encode to LSB for multi-byte array signals
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #133 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 96.30% 96.31%
=======================================
Files 13 13
Lines 1463 1465 +2
=======================================
+ Hits 1409 1411 +2
Misses 54 54
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
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, I'll bump the version number and release it tomorrow.
Maybe one comment is that the padding style I think is needlessly stored on the LDF object. Do you plan on using it somewhere?
The padding style on the LDF object is being used when parsing the LDF: https://github.com/nuts4coffee/ldfparser/blob/padding_option/ldfparser/parser.py#L128 |
Brief
Add an optional parameter
pad_with_zero
to allow use a different padding of 1 instead of the default padding 0.Checklist
Resolves
Resolves #131
Evidence
Unit test updated.
Also via end-to-end test that generates the same payload data as Canoe with the signal definition in #131.
Analyze how the change might impact existing code
The change is backwards compatibale and does not change the existing behavior.
Provide evidence that the feature is tested and covered properly