feat: add makeUsingStub to BaseCommand
#4147
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
thetutlage
reviewed
May 9, 2023
Comment on lines
+21
to
+46
| class StubGenerator { | ||
| #command: BaseCommand | ListCommand | ||
| #flags: Record<string, any> | ||
|
|
||
| constructor(command: BaseCommand, flags: Record<string, any>) { | ||
| this.#command = command | ||
| this.#flags = flags | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| async generate(stubsRoot: string, stubPath: string, stubState: Record<string, any>) { | ||
| const stub = await this.#command.app.stubs.build(stubPath, { source: stubsRoot }) | ||
| const output = await stub.generate(Object.assign({ flags: this.#flags }, stubState)) | ||
|
|
||
| const entityFileName = slash(this.#command.app.relativePath(output.destination)) | ||
| const result = { ...output, relativeFileName: entityFileName } | ||
|
|
||
| if (output.status === 'skipped') { | ||
| this.#command.logger.action(`create ${entityFileName}`).skipped(output.skipReason) | ||
| return result | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| this.#command.logger.action(`create ${entityFileName}`).succeeded() | ||
| return result | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need this class? Can't we just inline all the generate method code inside the makeUsingStub method?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is to avoid duplicating the code in the ListCommand class that implements BaseCommand as I explain in my comment above
As it is the case for the terminate function for example
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ohhh, I see. I think, we will run into this issue more often as we try to expand the capabilities of the base command.
Should we fix it right now maybe using mixins?
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.
Proposed changes
Add a method
makeUsingStubto Ace BaseCommand.Further comments
Not sure about this PR. It doesn't seem very clean to me because we have a particular OOP architecture here and so I was forced to duplicate the code in
ListCommand, and also to leave thestubsGeneratorproperty in public. (that's also why I preferred to using composition here by extracting the StubGenerator class)I almost went further and refactored it maybe with Mixins (to remove the fact that ListCommand implements BaseCommand) because it seems to be problematic
But I prefered to keep it simple and just duplicate for the moment because it's a very small change
Let me know what you think!