feat: If DeclarativeRecipe only has already-initialized recipes, don't require initialization #4267
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What's changed?
I've updated the way that DeclarativeRecipe.validate() works. Before, it was always required to call
DeclarativeRecipe.initialize()
in order to validate that all recipes were initialized before using the recipe.What's your motivation?
There are use cases where a DeclarativeRecipe can be constructed with already-instantiated recipe objects. In this case, we don't want to require initialization.
Anything in particular you'd like reviewers to focus on?
N/A
Anyone you would like to review specifically?
@sambsnyd
Have you considered any alternatives or workarounds?
Yes, the most important part here was to fix a null pointer. Before this change, the validation code was as follows:
If
initialize
was not called, theninitValidation
would be null. the.and(initValidation)
would throw a NullPointerException.The most important aspect of this PR was to fix that NullPointerException, and I considered doing so and keeping the validation the same otherwise:
This would have the effect that a DeclarativeRecipe that didn't have
.initialize()
called on it would still throw a warning, but not blow up.Any additional context
N/A
Checklist