Remove RichEmbed in favour of MessageEmbed #1584
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
1Computer1
approved these changes
Jun 11, 2017
kyranet
reviewed
Jun 11, 2017
src/structures/MessageEmbed.js
Outdated
| name: data.provider.name, | ||
| url: data.provider.url, | ||
| } : null; | ||
| this.provder = data.provider; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are unit tests, right? Won't they catch it?
|
can we just get rid of addBlankField |
devsnek
suggested changes
Jun 13, 2017
| * @param {boolean} [inline=false] Set the field to display inline | ||
| * @returns {MessageEmbed} This embed | ||
| */ | ||
| addBlankField(inline = false) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why? Its such a useful small thing! Ain't nobody got time to get the unicode code for the 0-width space
Ratismal
pushed a commit
to Ratismal/discord.js
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 5, 2017
* remove RichEmbed in favour of MessageEmbed * fix provider typo
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
From #1529, MessageEmbeds are now identical to RichEmbeds (with a few differences).
There's no further reason in having separate MessageEmbed and RichEmbed classes, as they're similar enough that you could require MessageEmbed inside of RichEmbed and export it to get identical behaviour.
This simplifies internal usage as well. Typechecking #1451 for RichEmbed and MessageEmbed could be simplified to just MessageEmbed.
In this commit:
<MessageEmbed>._apiTransform()private method added so that internal variables can continue using camel case.<MessageEmbed>.colorgetter returns null if colour is not set instead of throwing an error.<MessageEmbed>.createdAtgetter returns null if timestamp is unset/invalid.<RichEmbed>.addBlankFieldadded to MessageEmbed.Most properties that used to to be set to null when missing now default to undefined, to be more consistent with current RichEmbed behaviour.
Semantic versioning classification: