This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 26, 2024. It is now read-only.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Use immutabledict instead of frozendict #15113
Use immutabledict instead of frozendict #15113
Changes from 10 commits
b2d12ef
d5dc684
f1fef06
cbaf6cf
f7fe1a9
382ccef
d1e4d55
5fdbfbc
c51bd6f
1323e89
f319757
b96d2a8
77d0202
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
This file was deleted.
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.
It is a shame that we need this same code here as
_handle_immutabledict
in utils. I guess we previously had this baked into canonicaljson and Synapse?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 was also confused by this. It looks like Synapse had/has its own internal version of canonicaljson---did we never fully extract this out to library calls?
I wouldn't object to just using canonicaljson everywhere tbh, but I didn't feel like opening that can of worms here.
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.
It has its own JSON serialization code, but that isn't canonicaljson. (It is "just" JSON.)
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 do wonder if we should import the same function though from the utils module?
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.
Oh ISWYM. I can probably sneak that in
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.
Hmm, on second thoughts I'd like to leave that for a follow-up PR---I think it'd be best done alongside the tidy-ups I had in mind in #15113 (comment)