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

Content-Disposition Content-Location warns clean up #4546

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Mar 1, 2021

Conversation

vder
Copy link
Contributor

@vder vder commented Feb 28, 2021

partially address #4535

@vder vder changed the title series/0.22 Content-Disposition Content-Location warns clean uu Feb 28, 2021
@vder vder changed the title Content-Disposition Content-Location warns clean uu Content-Disposition Content-Location warns clean up Feb 28, 2021
@vder
Copy link
Contributor Author

vder commented Feb 28, 2021

Hi, could anyone take a look here as I'm not sure what should I do about it. As far as I understand one of the test failed, since it raised exception instead of getting actual value:
image
I've tried to switch to this specific jvm version to reproduce it locally, but it has just worked fine.

Copy link
Member

@rossabaker rossabaker left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There are a few flaky tests in blaze on CI. We've been more aggressively marking them as flaky, but that looks like another one. I'll mark that as well.

override def renderValue(writer: Writer): writer.type = {
final case class `Content-Disposition`(dispositionType: String, parameters: Map[String, String]) {
def key: `Content-Disposition`.type = `Content-Disposition`
lazy val value = v2.Header[`Content-Disposition`].value(this)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's a little weird to depend on our type class instance here. I think it would be best to flip that dependency. I'm also not convinced it still needs to be lazy. But this is forward progress as is, so, 👍.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agree, It just I've seen this value field in several other header classes and propagated it here. But I suppose we should rather removing these than adding ones.

@rossabaker rossabaker merged commit 9ddad7e into http4s:series/0.22 Mar 1, 2021
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