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

Proposal: Add default pair for operations #484

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Dec 11, 2020
Merged

Conversation

Prnyself
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@Prnyself Prnyself requested a review from Xuanwo December 10, 2020 10:14
we should handle conflict.
Since the operations with the same name handle different targets (`Servicer` and `Storager`),
I think we should handle the separately.
```go
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Add empty line here.


Since one service may just implement a part of operations in [storage],
there are two ways to define default pairs struct:
- Unify struct in [storage], so that we can maintain it only once.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Add empty line here.

and make sure that `pairs from args` can overwrite default pair, and this should be **generated**.
For example, we parse the pairs sequentially from the slice of pairs,
so we should create a new slice of pairs and append `pairs from args` to the slice.
```go
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Add empty line here.

docs/design/22-add-default-set-for-operations.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@Xuanwo Xuanwo merged commit 3a3dd41 into master Dec 11, 2020
@Xuanwo Xuanwo deleted the proposal/default-pair branch December 11, 2020 09:27
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.

None yet

2 participants