Closed
Conversation
Member
|
Hi @heinrichschiller Thanks for the PR. I totally see where you’re coming from, but I try to keep these two libraries completely separate, even if that means having some duplicated logic. It’s a bit more maintenance, but it keeps each package independent and easier to reason about on its own. But I really appreciate you taking the time to look into this! Thanks :-) |
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Hello,
While looking through the different Selective libraries, I noticed that both selective/array-reader and selective/config contain identical code. That made me wonder if it wouldn’t be better for selective/config to wrap the functionality of selective/array-reader instead of maintaining duplicate code.
So, I refactored the code, and selective/array-reader is now used directly. Hopefully, this makes the code cleaner and easier to maintain. Its behavior should be exactly the same as before—at least it still passes the tests.
Is this useful for you, or should it just be discarded? I’ll leave that up to you. :)
Best regards,
Heinrich Schiller