closes #430 #436
closes #430 #436
Conversation
| @@ -935,7 +935,7 @@ def __init__(self, property_owner, type_uri, reference_type_uri, | |||
| super().__init__(property_owner, type_uri, lower_bound, upper_bound, | |||
| validation_rules, initial_value) | |||
| self.reference_type_uri = reference_type_uri | |||
| if self._sbol_owner is not None: | |||
| if self._sbol_owner is None: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this adjusted branch is ever taken, it will break on line 940, because it will attempt to assign to None.properties.
@tcmitchell : do you remember why we have this setting property_store to the empty list? It appears to be preventing initialization with init value from being done as expected in at least some cases.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do not.
I think _sbol_owner is the pointer to the SBOL object that "owns" this object. It's possible this path was trying to mimic something in the C++ code.
I think if this change passes the new unit test, and this change does not fail any other unit tests, then it should be ok.
|
Hi @tcmitchell thanks for approving, but I think the if statement should be removed entirely. As @jakebeal if it would ever be true (may be impossible). Do you agree with this? |
Second attempt of #431, this one should pass tests after the fix from #435. closes #430