- 
          
- 
                Notifications
    You must be signed in to change notification settings 
- Fork 6.2k
Refactor code_indexer to use an SearchOptions struct for PerformSearch #29724
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
          
     Merged
      
      
            6543
  merged 8 commits into
  go-gitea:main
from
6543-forks:refactor/codeSearchUseOptionStruct
  
      
      
   
  Mar 16, 2024 
      
    
  
     Merged
                    Changes from all commits
      Commits
    
    
            Show all changes
          
          
            8 commits
          
        
        Select commit
          Hold shift + click to select a range
      
      ac713c9
              
                let code_indexer use an SearchOptions struct for PerformSearch
              
              
                6543 fc52fce
              
                smal int
              
              
                6543 e7bd0e2
              
                Merge branch 'main' into refactor/codeSearchUseOptionStruct
              
              
                6543 1a0df0e
              
                Merge branch 'main' into refactor/codeSearchUseOptionStruct
              
              
                6543 5c0bbb1
              
                Update modules/indexer/code/search.go
              
              
                6543 5b5e184
              
                Merge branch 'main' into refactor/codeSearchUseOptionStruct
              
              
                6543 5631d3e
              
                Merge branch 'main' into refactor/codeSearchUseOptionStruct
              
              
                6543 de98310
              
                Merge branch 'main' into refactor/codeSearchUseOptionStruct
              
              
                6543 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
          Failed to load comments.   
        
        
          
      Loading
        
  Jump to
        
          Jump to file
        
      
      
          Failed to load files.   
        
        
          
      Loading
        
  Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
  
    
      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
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      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
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      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
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      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
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      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
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      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
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      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
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      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
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      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
    
  
  
    
              
  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.
  
    
  
    
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.
I do not think
opts == nilmakes sense, how could it be nil? If "nil" opts means a bug, it should be handled in development stage.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.
It should not be nil ... but better not panic
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.
If it shouldn't be nil, why not report the errors in development stage? Just by a panic.
I really dislike hiding errors. It makes it more difficult to debug some bugs.
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.
NO we should not panic if we can arange it. To hope for stacktraces to get reported as "linting" methode is wrong !!!
But what we can do is create a proper error to check against
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.
NO, why it would panic if there is no bug in code?
Golang library itself panics a lot if something is totally wrong.
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 also don't think we should check
opts == nilhere. It should not be nil if our code is right. Otherwise, you need to check another thousand places.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.
Let me check (again) what comsumers this func has ... and also introduce a proper error instead of a ignore on keyword==""
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.
Hmm ... I only mean
opts == nilcheck doesn't make sense.if keyword == ""looks good to me, I do not think it's worth to introduce to many "errors".Golang has a very bad error system, TBH I have been tired of writing a lot of
if err != nil { ctx.ServerError }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.
Do you wana create a pull?
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.
Since it has been merged, I think it could be left there as-is, no good no harm.