Skip to content

Allow to set custom cache key through options #10

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.

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 3, 2018

Conversation

matteodem
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@matteodem
Copy link
Contributor Author

For some reason withCache calls on the same level generate the same cache keys. This option will allow to define a custom key.

@matteodem
Copy link
Contributor Author

Need some guidance on how to fix the unit tests. Hope the config makes sense

@matteodem
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Intellicode did you have time to look at this?

@Intellicode
Copy link
Owner

Intellicode commented Apr 1, 2018

@matteodem Sorry, I completely missed it! Looks fine to me :)

update: Would you mind to fix the tests? Then I'll merge + release

@Intellicode
Copy link
Owner

You can fix the tests by providing a default for options, for example as part as the function arguments like this: options = {}

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-2.2%) to 91.892% when pulling 91a3d06 on matteodem:patch-1 into 3e579e0 on Intellicode:master.

2 similar comments
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-2.2%) to 91.892% when pulling 91a3d06 on matteodem:patch-1 into 3e579e0 on Intellicode:master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-2.2%) to 91.892% when pulling 91a3d06 on matteodem:patch-1 into 3e579e0 on Intellicode:master.

@Intellicode Intellicode merged commit 07665b8 into Intellicode:master Apr 3, 2018
@matteodem matteodem deleted the patch-1 branch April 3, 2018 19:13
@matteodem
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Intellicode thanks!

@Intellicode
Copy link
Owner

@matteodem you too, made a new release for you as well!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants