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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Revert context changes on error #508
Revert context changes on error #508
Changes from 10 commits
5069f8d
7e2b6fc
48e163b
c2d3562
751ed6c
dbc4de3
7e0dce5
b1c0612
6ad805f
e40f0f8
7d05976
9cacabe
6d8b258
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
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.
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.
I'm not sure your suggested tuple destructuring makes things any clearer; better to keep unrelated functionality on separate lines.
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.
@Ph0enixKM wdyt? Imo it looks clearer, but It's just a preference so vox populi, vox Dei
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.
The modified version looks clearer because it favors the never-nesting approach. I like the change that @KrosFire made.
Early return is more verbose. If we had even more nested
if..let
then this change would highlight the issue even more. The code will keep the indentation level while the original nested code will be a bunch of if's nested inside.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.
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.
I'm not sure this makes things any clearer.
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.
I think that what @KrosFire suggested is slightly more readable because it eliminates the need for conversion
.to_string()
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.
I've removed the unnecessary
.to_string()
, but that.map_or()
construct seems unnecessarily verbose. I tend to write nested chains ofif
statements, because it puts each thing being tested on a single line, reducing the conceptual load.