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

Simplify requirements calculation in k6 inspect #2444

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 15, 2022
Merged

Simplify requirements calculation in k6 inspect #2444

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 15, 2022

Conversation

na--
Copy link
Member

@na-- na-- commented Mar 15, 2022

We didn't end up merging more PRs in the next branch, so this is exactly the same as #2409, only a PR to master this time

@na-- na-- added this to the v0.38.0 milestone Mar 15, 2022
@na-- na-- requested a review from mstoykov March 15, 2022 12:12
Comment on lines +350 to 354
//
// TODO: completely remove this?
func (r *Runner) IsExecutable(name string) bool {
_, exists := r.Bundle.exports[name]
return exists
return r.Bundle.IsExecutable(name)
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is used so unless we change the Runner interfaces it's needed to stay. Arguably the Runner interface is quite big and IMO has parts that have just been piled one over the years. A full redesign though is probably better left for later.

I just did look into it and I think IsExecutualbe as well as Setup/Teardown around stuff should probably be moved to not the Runner and consolidated a bunch. Unfortunately that looks like it will need a lot of changes across k6 and some unknown unknowns that I don't think we should try to figure out now.

But tl;dr: you can't remove this, easily

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, I already addressed it in #2409 (comment), but I remove this TODO in a future PR, for now I'd prefer to merge it just so I don't have to rebase everything again.

But yeah, mid to long term, now that we have a (hopefully) viable solution for refactoring the mess of the Engine away, we really need to start looking at refactoring the Runner mess 😞 See also this comment from one of the other PRs #2412 (comment)

Copy link
Contributor

@mstoykov mstoykov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I really would've preferred if js.Runner and consequently js.Bundle weren't directly used in cmd(or anywhere else but js) but that likely needs a complete refactor and this is in general better so 👍

Copy link
Contributor

@olegbespalov olegbespalov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍

@na-- na-- merged commit e464349 into master Mar 15, 2022
@na-- na-- deleted the next branch March 15, 2022 17:26
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.

3 participants