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

Regenerated code with correct object types. (bunq/sdk_csharp#51) #79

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 15, 2018
Merged

Regenerated code with correct object types. (bunq/sdk_csharp#51) #79

merged 2 commits into from
Feb 15, 2018

Conversation

OGKevin
Copy link
Contributor

@OGKevin OGKevin commented Jan 26, 2018

This PR closes/fixes the following issues:

@OGKevin OGKevin added this to the 0.12.5 milestone Jan 26, 2018
@OGKevin OGKevin self-assigned this Jan 26, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Jan 29, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Jan 29, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Jan 29, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Jan 29, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Jan 29, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Jan 29, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Jan 29, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Feb 1, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Feb 1, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Feb 1, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Feb 1, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Feb 1, 2018
@bunq bunq deleted a comment Feb 1, 2018
@OGKevin OGKevin requested a review from epels February 2, 2018 11:23
epels
epels reviewed Feb 2, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@epels epels left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks OK overall. Just some structural notes:

  • For some classes, OBJECT_TYPE is renamed to OBJECT_TYPE_XXX, whilst in others it is simply removed. Is this intentional?

  • Why do we pass around IDs now, instead of models? And it does not seem to be consistent.

@OGKevin
Copy link
Contributor Author

OGKevin commented Feb 2, 2018 •
edited
Loading

@epels yes the removal of OBJECT_TYPE is intentional.

The other comment I dont understand do you have an example ?

@epels
Copy link

epels commented Feb 2, 2018

@OGKevin Example in BillingContractSubscription: before, we returned BunqResponse<BillingContractSubscription> and you're changing that to BunqResponse<int>.

@OGKevin
Copy link
Contributor Author

OGKevin commented Feb 2, 2018

@epels that has to do with the view definitions 😉.

@OGKevin OGKevin assigned andrederoos and unassigned epels Feb 2, 2018
@andrederoos andrederoos changed the title Regenerated code with correct obejct types. (bunq/sdk_csharp#51) Regenerated code with correct object types. (bunq/sdk_csharp#51) Feb 15, 2018
@andrederoos andrederoos merged commit 031ec68 into develop Feb 15, 2018
@andrederoos andrederoos deleted the bunq/sdk_csharp#51-fix-wrong-object-types branch February 15, 2018 17:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@epels epels epels left review comments

@andrederoos andrederoos andrederoos approved these changes

Assignees

@andrederoos andrederoos

@OGKevin OGKevin

Labels
Can be merged Reviewed by André
Projects
None yet
Milestone
0.12.5
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

TokenQrRequestIdeal returns the wrong type
3 participants
@OGKevin @epels @andrederoos