[Redis 6.2] Add MINID and LIMIT options to xtrim

[wcmonty]

Adds the following options to the xtrim command:

• Set the strategy to MINID
• Set the limit option

This probably isn't the ideal interface for the #xtrim method, but I tried not to add breaking changes.

# Interface in this PR
xtrim(key, len_or_id, strategy: 'MAXLEN', approximate: false, limit: nil)

# Possible alternative interface (but requires a breaking change)
xtrim(key, maxlen: nil, minid: nil, approximate: false, limit: nil)

See the documentation at https://redis.io/commands/xtrim/

References #978

[byroot]

I'm not convinced all this validation is worth it, might as well directly pass it to the server.

[wcmonty]

Updated in 5d7ceea

[byroot]

Suggested change

	args = [:xtrim, key, strategy, (approximate ? '~' : nil), len_or_id].compact
	args = [:xtrim, key, strategy]
	args << '~' if approximate
	args << len_or_id

I know the code was like this, but I'd rather add to the array only when necessary than to compact nil elements. It's less error prone.

[wcmonty]

Apparently, we are going to have to either compact/handle the nils in this test case or change the behavior:
https://github.com/redis/redis-rb/blob/master/test/lint/streams.rb#L131 . If we don't then, the we receive a TypeError with this message Unsupported command argument type: NilClass.

A couple of options:

• Change the behavior so that we throw the TypeError instead of a Redis::CommandError
• Leave as-is, and compact one
• Combine your suggestion above with a compact before we call send_command

What's your preference?

[byroot]

or change the behavior:
https://github.com/redis/redis-rb/blob/master/test/lint/streams.rb#L131

Yeah, that is inconsistent with the rest of the library, just remove that part of the test.

[wcmonty]

Updated and squashed into 5d7ceea

[byroot]

Suggested change

	send_command(args.compact)
	send_command(args)

[wcmonty]

Sorry, that slipped through. Updated in 4321159

[byroot]

The CI failures seem legit. I assume there another test passing nil as argument somewhere.

[wcmonty]

So the CI failures were because I expected that the ensure would be skipped in cases where were were skipping the spec. Seems like that's common enough to have it's own Rubocop cop. I pushed up d7926fe. If that looks good, I'll squash the changes.

[wcmonty]

Alright, I squashed the commits. Thanks for working with me on this.