Modifiable Contract #27
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
johguentner
reviewed
Aug 21, 2021
Member
johguentner
left a comment
johguentner
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perfect to differ between modifiable and non-modifiable properties.
Can be included just like that!
- $value is different for each property - the empty Interface should be sufficient for checking, if the property is modifiable
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I thought it would be useful to add the
value()method to theModifiablecontract, because all modifiable properties share this method. However, while the return type of thevalue()method is always an inheritant ofProperty, the input parameter to this method differ a lot. Just compareTextwithMultiselectfor example, so the interface method is not suitable for inheritance (this is why all the tests fail of course).So, one possibility is to implement the Modifiable Contract as an empty interface without any declarations just for better code readability / overview purpose. The other possibility is to toss it completely. ^^
@johguentner What do you think?