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

remove Iterators.jl #49

Closed

Conversation

ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

It is causing a bunch of problems

JuliaLang/julia#21969

and it only needed one function.

@codecov-io
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #49 into master will decrease coverage by 0.54%.
The diff coverage is 81.81%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #49      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.96%   96.42%   -0.55%     
==========================================
  Files           6        7       +1     
  Lines         594      616      +22     
==========================================
+ Hits          576      594      +18     
- Misses         18       22       +4
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/iterators.jl 81.81% <81.81%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update dca8530...29d452d. Read the comment docs.

@JeffBezanson
Copy link

Base.Iterators.flatten also provides this functionality.

@musm
Copy link
Contributor

musm commented Jun 15, 2017

The only issue to determine is what to do with the [] case

Using Base.Iterators.flatten
[combinations([])...]
gives
ERROR: ArgumentError: argument to Flatten must contain at least one iterator
whereas currently with chain
[combinations([])...] == []

@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member Author

Julia v0.6 has been released. Can we merge some fix, even if it's not this one?

@musm
Copy link
Contributor

musm commented Jun 20, 2017

see #50 , we should probably close this in favor of that PR

@musm musm closed this Jun 25, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants