Skip to content
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

feat: make isMutator public #6316

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 8, 2022
Merged

Conversation

BeksOmega
Copy link
Collaborator

The basics

  • I branched from develop
  • My pull request is against develop
  • My code follows the style guide
  • I ran npm run format and npm run lint

The details

Resolves

N/A

Proposed Changes

Make isMutator public.

Behavior Before Change

There was no way for external developers to tell if a workspace was a mutator workspace.

Behavior After Change

There is a way for external developers to tell if a workspace is a mutator workspace.

Reason for Changes

Fixing google/blockly-samples#1169, and also just general usefulness

Test Coverage

N/A

Documentation

N/A

Additional Information

N/A

@BeksOmega BeksOmega requested a review from a team as a code owner August 4, 2022 23:32
@BeksOmega BeksOmega requested a review from maribethb August 4, 2022 23:32
/** Is this workspace the surface for a flyout? */
isFlyout = false;
get isFlyout(): boolean {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

getters and setters are banned by the js style guide (we use them in limited cases involving moving/deprecating properties but shouldn't use them in regular code)

also i don't like having "internal" as part of the name of the property. so i would suggest flyout for the property and IsFlyout for the function, maybe? i think that would be the recommended pattern in java at least.

but i guess that would be a breaking change since isFlyout is public... so either isFlyout and getIsFlyout or something better you come up with or just scrap the idea and keep the properties only. what do you think?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

getters and setters are banned by the js style guide

They are not banned by the ts style guide though.

but i guess that would be a breaking change since isFlyout is public... so either isFlyout and getIsFlyout

Yeah this is the problem I ran into, which is why I ended up going with the getters. Because getIsFlyout() is.... not great.

My vote is either go with the getters as they currently are, or just keep them as properties only.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok thanks for the pointer to the right place in the TS style guide. They are still "not recommended" because closure compiler doesn't deal with them well but this seems to fit when they're a good choice, and for future uses let's try to avoid with better property names for new properties

@BeksOmega BeksOmega merged commit 8f4b49a into google:develop Aug 8, 2022
@BeksOmega BeksOmega deleted the feat/is-mutator branch October 4, 2022 18:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants