This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 27, 2023. It is now read-only.
feat: refactor validate #61
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
|
Can you rebase this? |
BREAKING CHANGE: validate no longer returns a boolean, but throws an error on invalid input.
wemeetagain
force-pushed
the
feat/refactor-validate
branch
from
d4cd2bc
to
9070315
Compare
vasco-santos
approved these changes
Jul 16, 2020
26 tasks
vasco-santos
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 11, 2020
* feat: refactor validate BREAKING CHANGE: validate no longer returns a boolean, but throws an error on invalid input.
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Builds off of #60
Resolves ChainSafe/js-libp2p-gossipsub#105
This is a breaking change as it changes the signature and behavior of
validateto throw an error on invalid input, rather than return a boolean.We can retain the single parameter,
message, instead of also including a separatepeerIdparam.We do this by changing the type of
messagetoInMessage, which attaches areceivedFromproperty.