Eric Hanson
Eric Hanson
Ok, I removed the outlining exceptions bit because I couldn't figure out how to do it quickly (despite the nice example provided by ArgCheck.jl), but I figure that can be...
Bump. Would be nice to get this in for 1.8 or to decide we don’t want it (or want it if …).
Just because this is simpler and having a nice alternative to `@assert` to use and to point to in code reviews is more important to me than performance (outlining etc)...
> avoid having conflicts between what an established package means with @check and what Base means there's no conflict here with meaning; semantically, this PR's `@check` is identical in meaning...
Maybe @jw3126 would be willing to upstream ArgCheck’s `@check` macro to Base? It is fuller featured though more complicated than this PR which just duplicates `@assert` with a new name....
1. People abuse `@assert` since it’s “easier” since you don’t need a new dependency 2. If we start turning off `@assert` sometimes (as we have every right to do) it’s...
BTW, ArgCheck hasn't had any changes since June 2022, so the slow release cadence of Base actually seems totally fine at this stage of maturity.
I don't know dataframes meta but that looks quite complicated; what about just: ```julia vars = [:a_1 => "A 1", :a_2 => "A 2"] stack(rename(d, vars), last.(vars)) ```