Skip to content
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

Use <= instead of inspect to cater to subclasses of Neography::Node #112

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 22, 2013
Merged

Use <= instead of inspect to cater to subclasses of Neography::Node #112

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 22, 2013

Conversation

ujjwalt
Copy link
Contributor

@ujjwalt ujjwalt commented Oct 22, 2013

No description provided.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same when pulling 47cba4c on ujjwalt:patch-1 into c6485db on maxdemarzi:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same when pulling 5eb807a on ujjwalt:patch-1 into c6485db on maxdemarzi:master.

maxdemarzi added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 22, 2013
@maxdemarzi
Merge pull request #112 from ujjwalt/patch-1
b1829dc 
Use <= instead of inspect to cater to subclasses of Neography::Node
@maxdemarzi maxdemarzi merged commit b1829dc into maxdemarzi:master Oct 22, 2013
@maxdemarzi
Copy link
Owner

Thanks!

@ujjwalt ujjwalt deleted the patch-1 branch October 22, 2013 14:07
@ujjwalt
Copy link
Contributor Author

ujjwalt commented Oct 22, 2013

@maxdemarzi Just wondering why subclasses of Neography::Node call the find method of index.rb instead of the find defined within the class?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@ujjwalt @coveralls @maxdemarzi