feat: restore missing typeguards #8328
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
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎ 1 Ignored Deployment
|
github-actions
bot
requested review from
iCrawl,
kyranet,
SpaceEEC and
vladfrangu
kyranet
approved these changes
Jul 21, 2022
iCrawl
force-pushed
the
interaction-typeguards
branch
from
d5e1861
to
d174db8
Compare
|
Closes #8321 if merged |
vladfrangu
approved these changes
Jul 25, 2022
iCrawl
approved these changes
Jul 25, 2022
This was referenced Sep 2, 2022
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Please describe the changes this PR makes and why it should be merged:
This restores the following typeguard methods:
BaseInteraction#isAutocomplete()BaseInteraction#isCommand()BaseInteraction#isMessageComponent()BaseInteraction#isModalSubmit()While I agree with the principle that helper methods should not be provided where single equality checks suffice (e.g. channel typing) that principle cannot be consistently applied to Interaction types. For that reason, I believe having a consistent and intuitive library interface should take a higher priority.
Closes #8321 if merged