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

Refactor New function #70973

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 16, 2018
Merged

Refactor New function #70973

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 16, 2018

Conversation

ping035627
Copy link
Contributor

@ping035627 ping035627 commented Nov 13, 2018 •
edited

What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup

What this PR does / why we need it:
Refactor New function to reduce its complexity and improve readability.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@ping035627: Adding the "do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed" label because no release-note block was detected, please follow our release note process to remove it.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Nov 13, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @ping035627. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. and removed needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Nov 13, 2018
@ping035627
Copy link
Contributor Author

/assign @timothysc

@timothysc
Copy link
Member

/unassign @timothysc
/assign @bsalamat @k82cn

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot assigned bsalamat and k82cn and unassigned timothysc Nov 14, 2018
miguelbernadi
miguelbernadi reviewed Nov 14, 2018
View reviewed changes
pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go Outdated
@@ -231,6 +209,40 @@ func New(client clientset.Interface,
return sched, nil
}

func InitPolicyFromFile(policyFile string, policy *schedulerapi.Policy) error {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we need this to be exported? It was not previously so there are apparently no users for this (yet).

If it's exported it should have a comment documenting it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we should export it for clean code and reduce its complexity.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't see how exporting it reduces the code's complexity, but if it's exported it should have a documentation string in the form:

// InitPolicyFromFile ...

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for your advice, it should be added annotation actually.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

+1 to what @miguelbernadi said. These functions shouldn't be exported.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I just think about the point of clean code. Function should be small and do one thing, so I think we can extract the method for clean code and reduce its complexity.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sorry it seems we miscommunicated. I understand your point on extracting the code into a function. My concern is about exporting it outside the package (Upper-case methods are public in the package, therefore exported).

It would be fine just to make the methods package private, starting with lowercase, like:
func initPolicyFromFile(...

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

oh, misunderstand really, I have modified, thanks for your advice.

miguelbernadi
miguelbernadi reviewed Nov 14, 2018
View reviewed changes
pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go Outdated
return nil
}

func InitPolicyFromConfigMap(client clientset.Interface, policyRef *kubeschedulerconfig.SchedulerPolicyConfigMapSource, policy *schedulerapi.Policy) error {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

same as above.

@ping035627
Copy link
Contributor Author

/release-note-none
/priority backlog

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. and removed needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels Nov 15, 2018
@ping035627
Refactor New function
9e76073 
Signed-off-by: PingWang <wang.ping5@zte.com.cn>

add comments for InitPolicyFromFile

Signed-off-by: PingWang <wang.ping5@zte.com.cn>

make the methods package private

Signed-off-by: PingWang <wang.ping5@zte.com.cn>
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 16, 2018
bsalamat
bsalamat approved these changes Nov 16, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@bsalamat bsalamat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm
/approve

Thanks, @ping035627!

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bsalamat, ping035627

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 16, 2018
@bsalamat
Copy link
Member

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Nov 16, 2018
@bsalamat bsalamat added this to the v1.13 milestone Nov 16, 2018
@ping035627
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@fejta-bot
Copy link

/retest
This bot automatically retries jobs that failed/flaked on approved PRs (send feedback to fejta).

Review the full test history for this PR.

Silence the bot with an /lgtm cancel comment for consistent failures.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit a856c7a into kubernetes:master Nov 16, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@miguelbernadi miguelbernadi miguelbernadi left review comments

@bsalamat bsalamat bsalamat approved these changes

@k82cn k82cn Awaiting requested review from k82cn

@misterikkit misterikkit Awaiting requested review from misterikkit

Assignees

@bsalamat bsalamat

@k82cn k82cn

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.13
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
7 participants
@ping035627 @k8s-ci-robot @timothysc @bsalamat @fejta-bot @miguelbernadi @k82cn