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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Automate hospital admission patch #2043
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Automate hospital admission patch #2043
Changes from all commits
23e1055
39c433e
cbc7894
5b9e69a
1bb84d8
3d5701c
230086a
7bd15be
b71dd82
eed2a63
65a06d8
6995c8a
1666e0c
73a9063
98d631a
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could you add more explanations to this function? Otherwise people can easily get confused by this one and the function below.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hopefully the explanation I had made sense.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is fine without the issue date check, since there might be times where a date (or more) in a patch date range really has no source drop on that date.
Since
latest_timestamp
is only grabbing latest timestamp in theinput_dir
, not on the ftp server, and the patch code downloads files intoinput_dir
one issue date at a time, the old assert would still do what it's supposed to do fine in patching context.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Apart from docstring here, I suggest adding some patching instructions like this in the indicator readme too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should this be "if logger:" ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nope, basically how the patching code has worked is that it's a wrapper to called the run script within in a for loop with some customization and in order to make sure that logging is different from patching and a regular run is to pass on a logger as a parameter that's created from patch.
if it's a regular run, it's not going to have that
So the logic goes, if the logger exists already, then it's logger from patch, if not we need to create the logger