refactor: remote claim builder: simplify NewClaimBuilders#347
Closed
denopink wants to merge 3 commits intodenopink/chore/docsfrom
Closed
refactor: remote claim builder: simplify NewClaimBuilders#347denopink wants to merge 3 commits intodenopink/chore/docsfrom
denopink wants to merge 3 commits intodenopink/chore/docsfrom
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## denopink/chore/docs #347 +/- ##
======================================================
Coverage ? 51.33%
======================================================
Files ? 55
Lines ? 2063
Branches ? 0
======================================================
Hits ? 1059
Misses ? 969
Partials ? 35
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
denopink
force-pushed
the
denopink/refactor/simplify-builder-claims-
branch
from
d93c150 to
11f6fa8
Compare
…ctor and options - improving the documentation and grouping around remote claims builder's configuration and options, reducing the cognitive load (what is and what isn't related to themis' remote claims builder can be confusing and hard to follow)
- collapse `range o.Metadata` and `range o.Claims` for loops into the func `getStaticValues` since they're duplicates in terms of logic - moved the `IsStatic()` error check out of `getStaticValues` to `func (v Value) Validate() error` since that's a better home for that particular check and others, reducing the cognitive load
denopink
force-pushed
the
denopink/refactor/simplify-builder-claims-
branch
from
11f6fa8 to
375f56b
Compare
denopink
changed the base branch from
denopink/refactor/improve-pathvalues-name-
to
denopink/chore/docs
Contributor
Author
|
closing, replaced by #351 (fixed git history) |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
range o.Metadataandrange o.Claimsfor loops into the funcgetStaticValuessince they're duplicates in terms of logicIsStatic()error check out ofgetStaticValuestofunc (v Value) RawMessage() (json.RawMessage, error)since that's a better home for that particular check, reducing the cognitive load