-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 163
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
Consolidate LengthOf classes #910
Comments
@llorllale/z please, pay attention to this issue |
@neonailol/z this project will fix the problem faster if you donate a few dollars to it; just click here and pay via Stripe, it's very fast, convenient and appreciated; thanks a lot! |
@neonailol where would we put this |
@llorllale all of the implementations are |
@neonailol agreed |
@0crat in |
@llorllale Job #910 is now in scope, role is |
Bug was reported, see §29: +15 point(s) just awarded to @neonailol/z |
@neonailol FYI, when I agreed here I meant it probably should belong to |
@llorllale I am ok with that |
@neonailol, the PR was merged. |
@dgroup yes, this issue can be closed |
@llorllale please close the ticket as requestor approved the fix. |
The job #910 is now out of scope |
As the title says, why there are multiple LengthOf classes when one of the points of elegant objects is to provide rich constructors for the object? Each current implementation of LengthOf can be merged into a single class, and I don't see why it should not be that way.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: