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.

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

Added optional flag to disable exception on dependency check fail #25

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Feb 12, 2018

Conversation

starkmsu
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Copy link
Member

@KonstantinRyazantsev KonstantinRyazantsev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Adding optional parameter to the ctor is not backward compatible change. Consider to add separate constructor with throwExceptionOnFail flag. This will allow to use old code, which is referenced to the old version of the SettingsReader with new SettingReader version actually referenced by the entry-point assembly.

@@ -4,9 +4,19 @@ namespace Lykke.SettingsReader.Attributes
{
public class AmqpCheckAttribute : BaseCheckAttribute
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Plz add a description. It is a public shared class with an unclear name.

@LykkeCity LykkeCity deleted a comment from MikhailGerasimov Feb 12, 2018
@starkmsu starkmsu merged commit d84586f into master Feb 12, 2018
}

var checkResult = checker.CheckField(model, property.Name, val);
Console.WriteLine(checkResult.Description);
if (!checkResult.Result && checkResult.ThrowExceptionOnFail)

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Will be better to incapsulate this check and exception throwing into the FieldCheckResult.ThrowIfFailed() method or something like this.

@starkmsu starkmsu deleted the Critical-level branch April 18, 2018 11:16
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.

4 participants