| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
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
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low QualityRather than replacing the call to isValidAllChangenoteFiles with this inline implementation that uses getChangenotes(), do you think it would be better to update the existing implementation of isValidAllChangenoteFiles to accept ChangenoteFile[] and pass it the result of getChangenotes() here? That way you could keep (most of) the unit tests. You would need to move the definition of ChangenoteFile somewhere that is accessible to both files.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low QualityI deleted isValidAllChangenoteFiles because the filter became redundant, which just left it to perform reduce. At that point, I think the function became a thin wrapper, which doesn't add much value (IMO). The deleted tests themselves were also redundant because they tested the same conditions but at a different level of abstraction. It seemed "cleaner" to inline it and shorten the test suite, but I'm indifferent about it. If you have a strong preference for keeping it, I won't mind.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low QualityI am happy to merge this as-is for now. It's an easy enough change to make down the line if needed.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.