-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.8k
More instance methods #963
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
58674e8
Bot.get_file now allows passing a file instead of file_id
jsmnbom bc6e2d3
Add .get_file() to Audio, Document, PhotoSize, Sticker, Video, VideoN…
jsmnbom 5662fff
Add .send_*() methods to User and Chat
jsmnbom 65ee2b6
Tests for *.get_file() instance methods
jsmnbom e3505bd
Fix in send_*() for Chat and User
jsmnbom 45f2700
Tests for .send_*() for Chat and User
jsmnbom f1550bc
bot.py: Fix documentation style
tsnoam dbe4c1c
Revert parameter name to 'file_id' to maintain backward compat
tsnoam 39f4f36
Fix documentation
tsnoam File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
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.
bot
may beNone
on some extreme cases. I believe that on these cases we should raise an explicit RuntimeError.Though you may claim that we don't do that with
Message.reply_*()
methods. So maybe we should fix there 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.
That was the exact point I was gonna make xD
Does it matter what error it throws?
It seems like a lot of code for some superficial error that's unlikely to ever happen (as far as I understand it, it will never happen if users don't do stupid stuff, right?)
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.
Explicit errors are much easier to debug, especially in async systems, rather than deciphering a stack trace.
If you feel that the code is good as it is I won't object. I simply suggest to reconsider.
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.
i will leave this as is.