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

TASK: Use RouterInterface instead of concrete implementation #1228

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 20, 2018
Merged

TASK: Use RouterInterface instead of concrete implementation #1228

merged 4 commits into from
Mar 20, 2018

Conversation

Torsten85
Copy link
Contributor

Currently the concrete Router Implementation is used instead of the more flexible RouterInterface.

This PR ensures the RouterInterface is used.

Copy link
Collaborator

@aertmann aertmann left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

makes sense

@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ class RoutingCommandController extends CommandController

/**
* @Flow\Inject
* @var Router
* @var RouterInterface
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The RoutingCommandController invokes methods on the router that are not part of the interface, namely getRoutes()

@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ class InternalRequestEngine implements RequestEngineInterface

/**
* @Flow\Inject(lazy = false)
* @var Router
* @var RouterInterface
*/
protected $router;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sorry for that, was a bit in a hurry ;)

@@ -292,6 +292,9 @@ Neos\Flow\Property\PropertyMapper:
# ResourceManagement #
# #

Neos\Flow\Mvc\Routing\RouterInterface:
className: Neos\Flow\Mvc\Routing\Router

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You changed this in the section "ResourceManagement", There is already one for "MVC"

@bwaidelich
Copy link
Member

Makes sense in general, but there are some minor issues with the current change

Copy link
Member

@bwaidelich bwaidelich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks, looks good now (by reading)

@kdambekalns kdambekalns merged commit 9c38d2b into neos:master Mar 20, 2018
@Torsten85 Torsten85 deleted the router-interface branch March 20, 2018 18:32
ComiR pushed a commit to ComiR/flow-development-collection that referenced this pull request Aug 17, 2018
TASK: Use RouterInterface instead of concrete implementation
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.

5 participants