Slight refactoring and more doc-comments #291
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
|
Hi, thanks for the pr, the comment and refactor of implicitCongi looks good. |
masaeedu
changed the title
jneira
approved these changes
Apr 14, 2021
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I was reading through the codebase to try and understand what it does and encountered a bit that was a bit confusing to read. I tried breaking it apart a bit and added some doc comments, hopefully you agree that this represents a slight improvement.
I also encountered a type that doesn't seem to be used by any of the functions that ask for it (they use an
_prefixed variable to discard it). Can this type just be removed?