Skip to content

fixes #8673; Add operator's associativity check for stacks/infix_to_p… #8674

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Aug 1, 2023
Merged

fixes #8673; Add operator's associativity check for stacks/infix_to_p… #8674

merged 6 commits into from
Aug 1, 2023

Conversation

amirsoroush
Copy link
Contributor

@amirsoroush amirsoroush commented Apr 19, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Fixes #8673

Describe your change:

I also added a doctest to reveal the problem.

  • Add an algorithm?
  • Fix a bug or typo in an existing algorithm?
  • Documentation change?

Checklist:

  • I have read CONTRIBUTING.md.
  • This pull request is all my own work -- I have not plagiarized.
  • I know that pull requests will not be merged if they fail the automated tests.
  • This PR only changes one algorithm file. To ease review, please open separate PRs for separate algorithms.
  • All new Python files are placed inside an existing directory.
  • All filenames are in all lowercase characters with no spaces or dashes.
  • All functions and variable names follow Python naming conventions.
  • All function parameters and return values are annotated with Python type hints.
  • All functions have doctests that pass the automated testing.
  • All new algorithms include at least one URL that points to Wikipedia or another similar explanation.
  • If this pull request resolves one or more open issues then the commit message contains Fixes: #{$ISSUE_NO}.

@algorithms-keeper algorithms-keeper bot added enhancement This PR modified some existing files awaiting reviews This PR is ready to be reviewed labels Apr 19, 2023
@algorithms-keeper algorithms-keeper bot added the tests are failing Do not merge until tests pass label Apr 19, 2023
@ignacio-gn ignacio-gn mentioned this pull request Apr 23, 2023
Closed
14 tasks
@amirsoroush amirsoroush mentioned this pull request Apr 24, 2023
Closed
Siddhesh-Agarwal
Siddhesh-Agarwal reviewed Apr 25, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@Siddhesh-Agarwal Siddhesh-Agarwal left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Solves UP031

Lines 79 and 104 in ciphers/rsa_cipher.py can be changed to:

"ERROR: Block size is {block_size} bits and key size is {key_size} bits. The RSA cipher "

and line 82 and 107 can be changed to:

.format(block_size=block_size*8, key_size=key_size)

rohan472000
rohan472000 reviewed Apr 25, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@rohan472000 rohan472000 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@amirsoroush you can run github actions again now, as your ruff failure issues has been fixed by my PR #8680, so, it shouldn't be fail this time.

@algorithms-keeper algorithms-keeper bot removed the tests are failing Do not merge until tests pass label Apr 25, 2023
@tianyizheng02
Copy link
Contributor

@amirsoroush Could you put Fixes #8673 in your PR description? This PR isn't linked to the issue because GitHub is very particular about the formatting of closing keywords.

@cclauss cclauss mentioned this pull request May 25, 2023
Closed
@algorithms-keeper algorithms-keeper bot added the tests are failing Do not merge until tests pass label Jul 31, 2023
@tianyizheng02
Copy link
Contributor

I've already fixed the ruff errors in #8913, so we can merge this once that PR gets merged

@amirsoroush
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tianyizheng02 Do I need to push an empty commit for tests to be passed?

@tianyizheng02
Copy link
Contributor

Once that other PR is merged, pulling the latest commits from the main branch should be enough

@tianyizheng02
Copy link
Contributor

@amirsoroush The other PR has been merged so try updating your branch

@algorithms-keeper algorithms-keeper bot removed the tests are failing Do not merge until tests pass label Aug 1, 2023
@tianyizheng02
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for your contribution!

@tianyizheng02 tianyizheng02 merged commit ce218c5 into TheAlgorithms:master Aug 1, 2023
@algorithms-keeper algorithms-keeper bot removed the awaiting reviews This PR is ready to be reviewed label Aug 1, 2023
@amirsoroush amirsoroush deleted the bug-fix-expression-tree branch August 1, 2023 18:30
sedatguzelsemme pushed a commit to sedatguzelsemme/Python that referenced this pull request Sep 15, 2024
@amirsoroush @tianyizheng02 @sedatguzelsemme
fixes TheAlgorithms#8673; Add operator's associativity check for stac…
520e4ba 
…ks/infix_to_p… (TheAlgorithms#8674)

* fixes TheAlgorithms#8673; Add operator's associativity check for stacks/infix_to_postfix_conversion.py

* fix ruff N806 in stacks/infix_to_postfix_conversion.py

* Update data_structures/stacks/infix_to_postfix_conversion.py

Co-authored-by: Tianyi Zheng <[email protected]>

* Update data_structures/stacks/infix_to_postfix_conversion.py

Co-authored-by: Tianyi Zheng <[email protected]>

---------

Co-authored-by: Tianyi Zheng <[email protected]>
@isidroas isidroas mentioned this pull request Jan 25, 2025
Closed
14 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@Siddhesh-Agarwal Siddhesh-Agarwal Siddhesh-Agarwal left review comments

@rohan472000 rohan472000 rohan472000 left review comments

@tianyizheng02 tianyizheng02 tianyizheng02 approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
enhancement This PR modified some existing files
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
4 participants
@amirsoroush @tianyizheng02 @Siddhesh-Agarwal @rohan472000