Improvements for the TimeIndexOps ergonomics and cleanup #1500
Conversation
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
ljeub-pometry
force-pushed
the
feature/TimeIndexOpsImprovements
branch
from
3f5c0b8
to
e0e5893
Compare
This comment was marked as duplicate.
This comment was marked as duplicate.
Sorry, something went wrong.
fabianmurariu
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 21, 2024
* change TimeIndexOps to return owned data * cleanup and format * unboxed time index * cargo lock * clean up * fix merge * clean up warnings * tweaks * bring back the matrix so tests actually run * no more openssl
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Make TimeIndexOps easier to use by implementing into variants where possible and returning timestamps as values rather than references
Why are the changes needed?
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change? If yes is this documented?
No
How was this patch tested?
the tests