pull_requests: 1234321667
This data as json
| id | node_id | number | state | locked | title | user | body | created_at | updated_at | closed_at | merged_at | merge_commit_sha | assignee | milestone | draft | head | base | author_association | repo | url | merged_by | auto_merge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1234321667 | PR_kwDOCGYnMM5JkkED | 526 | closed | 0 | Fix repeated calls to `Table.convert()` | 167893 | Fixes #525. All tests pass. There's perhaps a better way to name lambdas? There could be a collision if a caller passes a function with name like `lambda_123456`. SQLite [documentation](https://www.sqlite.org/appfunc.html) is a little, ah, lite on function name specs. If there is a character that can be used in place of underscore in a SQLite function name that is not permitted in a Python function identifier then that could be a good way to prevent accidental collisions. (I tried dash, colon, dot, no joy). Otherwise, there is little chance of this happening and if it should happen the risk is mitigated by now throwing an exception in the case of a (name, arity) collision without `replace=True`. <!-- readthedocs-preview sqlite-utils start --> ---- :books: Documentation preview :books:: https://sqlite-utils--526.org.readthedocs.build/en/526/ <!-- readthedocs-preview sqlite-utils end --> | 2023-02-09T00:14:49Z | 2023-05-08T21:56:05Z | 2023-05-08T21:53:58Z | 2023-05-08T21:53:58Z | 02f5c4d69d7b4baebde015c56e5bc62923f33314 | 0 | 486e0cc1cd67e98c22d1f125403144cdedfa3d58 | fc221f9b62ed8624b1d2098e564f525c84497969 | CONTRIBUTOR | 140912432 | https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-utils/pull/526 |
Links from other tables
- 0 rows from pull_requests_id in labels_pull_requests