Conversation
4687b1a to
fc3520b
Compare
lissyx
approved these changes
Feb 24, 2024
Contributor
lissyx
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That looks good to me, closer to the initial versions I did and then tried to make simpler.
lissyx
reviewed
Feb 24, 2024
lissyx
reviewed
Feb 24, 2024
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Follow up to #103
Replace opaque tuple with documented
SoVersion, more cleanly handle the last version potentially having 2 numbers, and add a few test cases that seem possible.@lissyx does this look ok to you?