Fix first yielding ignored if yielded value is identical to the previous #36
Conversation
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
shtaif
force-pushed
the
fix-first-yield-identical-to-prev-value
branch
from
4581170 to
f4947c4
Compare
shtaif
force-pushed
the
fix-first-yield-identical-to-prev-value
branch
from
f4947c4 to
b2903da
Compare
shtaif
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 7, 2025
## [0.4.1](v0.4.0...v0.4.1) (2025-01-07) ### Bug Fixes * first yielding wrongly ignored if yielded value is identical to the last one stored before ([#36](#36)) ([23ad98c](23ad98c))
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 0.4.1 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
# for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
# 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fix - on the first yield for some iterable that started iteration (in any of the libraries tools), if its value is identical to the last value picked up before that iterable started being iterated the consumer util would ignore it. - but it shouldn't, since although the value is identical to the last, we need to transition from
pendingFirst: truetopendingFirst: falsein this case since its the initial yield!