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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Remove parameter "prettyPrinting" #446

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Remove parameter "prettyPrinting" #446

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

dr0i
Copy link
Member

@dr0i dr0i commented Jun 2, 2022

@dr0i dr0i requested review from blackwinter and removed request for blackwinter June 2, 2022 08:03
blackwinter
blackwinter requested changes Jun 2, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@blackwinter blackwinter left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is it okay to break backwards compatibility?

Also, there are "unused imports" now.

@blackwinter
Copy link
Member

blackwinter commented Jun 2, 2022 •
edited

IMO, the better solution would be to deprecate the setter and then ignore deprecated setters in HelpPrinter (or even mark them as deprecated in the documentation).

@dr0i
Remove unused import and update test
17225ca 
Not "setPrettyPrinting(true)" in test doesn't change a thing, so just removing it.
@dr0i
Copy link
Member Author

dr0i commented Jun 2, 2022

Hm, you are right. Why not just leave it as it is?

@blackwinter
Copy link
Member

Why not just leave it as it is?

What do you mean? I thought the idea was to remove (or somehow hide) the setter so that the Flux command wouldn't have to be updated manually every time the documentation is generated (metafacture/metafacture-documentation#20).

@dr0i
Copy link
Member Author

dr0i commented Jun 2, 2022

I mean, the pretty printing parameter doesn't harm. It does just nothing. Why bother?

@blackwinter
Copy link
Member

blackwinter commented Jun 2, 2022 •
edited

I mean, the pretty printing parameter doesn't harm. It does just nothing. Why bother?

Okay, I see. Should that be discussed in metafacture/metafacture-documentation#19?

@dr0i
Copy link
Member Author

dr0i commented Jun 2, 2022

Closed in favour of #447.

@dr0i dr0i closed this Jun 2, 2022
@dr0i dr0i deleted the metafacture-documentation-19-deletePrettyPrintingInEncodeYaml branch June 2, 2022 09:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@blackwinter blackwinter blackwinter requested changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
2 participants
@dr0i @blackwinter