Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (8f77896) to head (1062e85).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main      #226   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           12        12           
  Lines         2211      2212    +1     
=========================================
+ Hits          2211      2212    +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

I also figured we'd better keep getcomments interface as well for the sake of backwards compatibility in a few future versions.

Finally all the checks passed :)

Thanks for the suggestion, and I agree get_comments is the better naming at this point, but the deprecation stuff is maintenance pain for not a lot of gain IMO. Can we just get_comments = getcomments + unittest coverage and be done with it?

Sorry. I got a little confused reading your message. So, you say we keep the change and modify the unit tests or to defer the change to a better time? (I'm fine either way. I'm already using getcomments without much trouble in my code. Just that it took me a while to figure out this is the neat way. :))

@mrbahrani If I understand @crobinso correctly, he is proposing the following:

• Renaming the existing method (as you already did).
• Add a getcomments attribute to the class and set its value to the method object self.get_comments (so that both method are identical).
• Don't bother with creating deprecation warnings or examples for the deprecated method.

Does that clarify things?