[5.6] Relocate the existence check for factory definitions - #22936
Merged
Merged
Conversation
mtvs
changed the title
Contributor
|
we're moving the check 1 step down the execution, so this is thrown by both i think it makes sense to move it closer to where we're actually calling the closure. LGTM. |
salmanarshad321
pushed a commit
to salmanarshad321/framework
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 23, 2026
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
When a factory is not defined the FactoryBuilder::raw() should throw InvalidArgumentException too.