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

Add Options.builder() method to get the builder in a more "fluent" manner #832

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Jan 25, 2023
Merged

Add Options.builder() method to get the builder in a more "fluent" manner #832

merged 3 commits into from Jan 25, 2023

Conversation

ghost
Copy link

@ghost ghost commented Jan 22, 2023

No much to explain to be honest.

@ghost ghost marked this pull request as draft January 22, 2023 17:07
@ghost ghost marked this pull request as ready for review January 22, 2023 17:07
* Creates a builder for the options.
* @return the builder.
*/
public static Builder newBuilder() {
Copy link
Contributor

@scottf scottf Jan 23, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  1. To be consistent with all the other builders, please name this method just builder.
  2. Can you move it below the comments for the builder, just before the class declaration.
  3. While you are there, can you remove the comment (line 582 in this code) is equivalent to calling {@link Nats#connect() Nats.connect()}. It isn't right.
  4. Last, can you please sign your commits. https://docs.github.com/en/authentication/managing-commit-signature-verification/signing-commits

@ghost ghost requested a review from scottf January 23, 2023 18:26
@scottf scottf changed the title Add Options#builder() (#831) Add Options.builder() method to get the builder in a more "fluent" manner Jan 23, 2023
@scottf scottf merged commit 48ed141 into nats-io:main Jan 25, 2023
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

1 participant