Skip to content

Fix citation key table #13151

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

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
May 20, 2025
Merged

Fix citation key table #13151

merged 6 commits into from
May 20, 2025

Conversation

koppor
Copy link
Member

@koppor koppor commented May 19, 2025

Fixes #13013

No CHANGELOG, because feature is not yet released

Mandatory checks

  • I own the copyright of the code submitted and I license it under the MIT license
  • [/] Change in CHANGELOG.md described in a way that is understandable for the average user (if change is visible to the user)
  • Tests created for changes (if applicable)
  • [/] Manually tested changed features in running JabRef (always required)
  • [/] Screenshots added in PR description (if change is visible to the user)
  • [/] Checked developer's documentation: Is the information available and up to date? If not, I outlined it in this pull request.
  • [/] Checked documentation: Is the information available and up to date? If not, I created an issue at https://github.com/JabRef/user-documentation/issues or, even better, I submitted a pull request to the documentation repository.

koppor and others added 2 commits May 19, 2025 21:22
Co-authored-by: Carl Christian Snethlage <50491877+calixtus@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Christoph <siedlerkiller@gmail.com>
@koppor koppor changed the title [experiment] Fix citation key table [experiment] Use gg May 19, 2025
@koppor koppor changed the title [experiment] Use gg Fix citation key table May 19, 2025
return fieldComparison;
}
}
assert !it1.hasNext() && !it2.hasNext();
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Using assertions for control flow is not recommended as they can be disabled at runtime, leading to unexpected behavior. Consider using a different approach to ensure iterators are exhausted.

@koppor koppor marked this pull request as ready for review May 20, 2025 12:30
return 1;
}

assert e1HasCitationKey && e2HasCitationKey;
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Using assertions for control flow is not recommended as they can be disabled at runtime. Consider using a more robust method to ensure both entries have citation keys.

@koppor koppor added the status: ready-for-review Pull Requests that are ready to be reviewed by the maintainers label May 20, 2025
Copy link

trag-bot bot commented May 20, 2025

@trag-bot didn't find any issues in the code! ✅✨

@koppor koppor added this pull request to the merge queue May 20, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit 5069894 May 20, 2025
2 checks passed
@koppor koppor deleted the fix-consistency-output branch May 20, 2025 19:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
status: ready-for-review Pull Requests that are ready to be reviewed by the maintainers
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Field Presence Consistency Check Result: Refine output
2 participants