-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
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
add bytes*.fill()
helper
#761
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
7c50e27
to
b555272
Compare
@@ -78,6 +79,27 @@ def random( | |||
def secret(cls: Type[_T_SizedBytes]) -> _T_SizedBytes: | |||
return cls.random(r=system_random) | |||
|
|||
@classmethod | |||
def fill(cls: Type[_T_SizedBytes], blob: bytes, fill: bytes, align: Literal["<", ">"] = ">") -> _T_SizedBytes: | |||
if len(blob) == cls._size: |
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.
if len(blob) > cls._size
, do we want to truncate and construct cls
then 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.
I am tending towards no. It seems like with these classes that truncation would be surprising. I think most use cases for this are tests where you are trying to create unique values. If your blob is too long and is truncated you hazard unexpectedly having multiple of the same value generated.
This isn't meant to be a 'format' level tool, but I will note that format just creates a larger output in this case.
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 11484936346Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.
Details
💛 - Coveralls |
No description provided.