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

fix #1121(StringSliceFlag set default value into destination) #1127

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Jun 4, 2020
Merged

fix #1121(StringSliceFlag set default value into destination) #1127

merged 2 commits into from Jun 4, 2020

Conversation

sgoroshko
Copy link
Contributor

@sgoroshko sgoroshko commented May 1, 2020 •
edited

What type of PR is this?

(REQUIRED)

  • bug
  • cleanup
  • documentation
  • feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

default value does not set in Destination field in StringSliceFlag.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

#1121

Release Notes

(REQUIRED)

 - fix bug, default value does not set in Destination field in StringSliceFlag.

@sgoroshko sgoroshko requested a review from a team as a code owner May 1, 2020 20:14
@sgoroshko sgoroshko requested review from coilysiren and asahasrabuddhe and removed request for a team May 1, 2020 20:14
saschagrunert
saschagrunert reviewed May 4, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@saschagrunert saschagrunert left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This now seems to be a duplicate of #1123

@coilysiren
Copy link
Member

This definitely looks like a duplicate of #1123

@sgoroshko & @atif-konasl can you both have a conversation about whose solution you think should move forward? We can't merge both

@coilysiren coilysiren mentioned this pull request May 4, 2020
Closed
coilysiren
coilysiren requested changes May 4, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@coilysiren coilysiren left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

feel free to re-request me when the duplication between #1127 and #1123 is resolved!

@atif-konasl
Copy link

@lynncyrin & @sgoroshko ,
i deleted my PR.

coilysiren
coilysiren previously approved these changes May 6, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@coilysiren coilysiren left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@coilysiren
Copy link
Member

ping @urfave/cli for a review here! 👋

saschagrunert
saschagrunert approved these changes May 14, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@saschagrunert saschagrunert left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

rliebz
rliebz reviewed May 15, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@rliebz rliebz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for pulling this fix together.

One main question here—Is this not a problem for other slice flags as well (int, int64, float)? While it's important we get fixes like this in, it's also necessary that we have consistent behavior between the flag types.

flag_string_slice.go Outdated
@@ -116,6 +116,14 @@ func (f *StringSliceFlag) GetValue() string {

// Apply populates the flag given the flag set and environment
func (f *StringSliceFlag) Apply(set *flag.FlagSet) error {

if f.Destination != nil {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nit: These nested if statements can be collapsed

if f.Destination != nil && f.Value != nil {

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Bump.

@erikwilson erikwilson mentioned this pull request May 21, 2020
Closed
@sgoroshko
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for pulling this fix together.

One main question here—Is this not a problem for other slice flags as well (int, int64, float)? While it's important we get fixes like this in, it's also necessary that we have consistent behavior between the flag types.

Float64SliceFlag - have no destination field
Int64SliceFlag - have no destination field
IntSliceFlag - have no destination field

@sgoroshko sgoroshko closed this May 22, 2020
@sgoroshko sgoroshko reopened this May 22, 2020
@sgoroshko sgoroshko requested a review from rliebz May 22, 2020 03:54
@rliebz
Copy link
Member

rliebz commented May 22, 2020

Weird that they don't have a destination field, but definitely not a requirement for this change to fix that.

saschagrunert
saschagrunert previously approved these changes May 23, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@saschagrunert saschagrunert left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, but let’s address https://github.com/urfave/cli/pull/1127/files#discussion_r425503716

@sgoroshko sgoroshko dismissed stale reviews from saschagrunert and coilysiren via 10fe017 May 31, 2020 17:52
@sgoroshko
Copy link
Contributor Author

fix nested conditions

@coilysiren
Copy link
Member

🚢

@coilysiren coilysiren merged commit b190f2d into urfave:master Jun 4, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@rliebz rliebz rliebz approved these changes

@coilysiren coilysiren coilysiren approved these changes

@asahasrabuddhe asahasrabuddhe Awaiting requested review from asahasrabuddhe

@saschagrunert saschagrunert Awaiting requested review from saschagrunert

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
5 participants
@sgoroshko @coilysiren @atif-konasl @rliebz @saschagrunert