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

Integrate incident types into Incidents API documentation #2725

Merged

Conversation

api-clients-generation-pipeline[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@api-clients-generation-pipeline api-clients-generation-pipeline bot requested a review from a team as a code owner October 7, 2024 14:56
// will change when the set of required properties is changed.
func NewIncidentTypeAttributes(name string) *IncidentTypeAttributes {
this := IncidentTypeAttributes{}
var isDefault bool = false

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🔵 Code Quality Violation

Suggested change
var isDefault bool = false
var isDefault = false
redundant type declaration (...read more)

In Go, it is considered good practice to avoid declaring the type when it is obvious or when the type can be inferred from the assignment. This is known as type inference, and it offers several benefits:

  1. Readability: By omitting the explicit type declaration, the code becomes more concise and easier to read. Redundant type declarations can clutter the code and introduce unnecessary noise. When the type is obvious from the assigned value, omitting the type declaration can improve code readability and make it more expressive.
  2. Flexibility and maintainability: Using type inference allows for easier changes to the underlying type without manually updating every instance where it is declared. If the type needs to be changed in the future, you only need to modify the assignment, and Go's type inference mechanism will handle the rest. This reduces the maintenance effort required and improves code maintainability.
  3. Clean code appearance: Omitting the type declaration when it is obvious results in cleaner code syntax. Code that is free from excessive explicit type declarations tends to look more elegant and consistent. It minimizes redundancy and focuses on the essential logic, contributing to a cleaner and more streamlined codebase.
  4. Compatibility: Go's type inference mechanism ensures compatibility with future changes to the type of the assigned value. If the assigned value is changed to a type-compatible value, the code will continue to compile and run without any modifications. This allows for flexibility in your code while maintaining correctness.

That being said, it is important to strike a balance and avoid excessive use of type inference. Clear and explicit type declarations are still valuable when they enhance code clarity, such as when documenting or expressing the intent of the code. It is essential to find the right balance between brevity and clarity in your codebase.

By utilizing Go's type inference mechanism and avoiding explicit type declarations when the type is obvious, you can achieve more readable, maintainable, and concise code that adheres to Go's idiomatic style.

View in Datadog  Leave us feedback  Documentation

}

localVarPath := localBasePath + "/api/v2/incidents/config/types/{incident_type_id}"
localVarPath = strings.Replace(localVarPath, "{"+"incident_type_id"+"}", _neturl.PathEscape(datadog.ParameterToString(incidentTypeId, "")), -1)

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟠 Code Quality Violation

Suggested change
localVarPath = strings.Replace(localVarPath, "{"+"incident_type_id"+"}", _neturl.PathEscape(datadog.ParameterToString(incidentTypeId, "")), -1)
localVarPath = strings.ReplaceAll(localVarPath, "{"+"incident_type_id"+"}", _neturl.PathEscape(datadog.ParameterToString(incidentTypeId, "")))
Do not call Replace with a negative limit, use ReplaceAll instead (...read more)

In Go, the strings.Replace() function is used to replace a certain substring within a string with another substring. The function takes in four parameters: the original string, the old substring to be replaced, the new substring that will replace the old one, and an integer limit dictating how many replacements to be made.

Calling strings.Replace() with a negative limit doesn't really make sense. According to the Go documentation, if limit is negative, there is no limit on the number of replacements. Which means it will replace all instances of old substring in the original string with a new substring.

For example:

fmt.Println(strings.Replace("oink oink oink", "k", "ky", -2))

In this example, Replace returns a copy of the string "oink oink oink" where "k" is replaced by "ky" everywhere it appears, because limit is -2.

So it's not necessarily "incorrect" to use a negative limit, but it can create misunderstandings in your code. It's best to use a limit of -1 when you want to replace all instances, as this convention is more commonly understood to mean "no limit".

But if you specifically want to avoid using negative limit for Replace or looking for replace method with better efficiency, using strings.NewReplacer() could be a better option when there are multiple string pairs need to be replaced, where you can specify a list of old-new string pairs.

Or you can use strings.ReplaceAll(). It is equivalent to Replace with a limit of -1. It's arguably clearer and more self-explanatory than using a negative limit with strings.Replace().

For example:

fmt.Println(strings.ReplaceAll("oink oink oink", "o", "ky"))

It replaces all instances of "o" in the string "oink oink oink" by "ky".

View in Datadog  Leave us feedback  Documentation

@api-clients-generation-pipeline api-clients-generation-pipeline bot force-pushed the datadog-api-spec/generated/3172 branch from 6f3ca47 to 39f2e63 Compare October 18, 2024 20:15
}

localVarPath := localBasePath + "/api/v2/incidents/config/types/{incident_type_id}"
localVarPath = strings.Replace(localVarPath, "{"+"incident_type_id"+"}", _neturl.PathEscape(datadog.ParameterToString(incidentTypeId, "")), -1)

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟠 Code Quality Violation

Suggested change
localVarPath = strings.Replace(localVarPath, "{"+"incident_type_id"+"}", _neturl.PathEscape(datadog.ParameterToString(incidentTypeId, "")), -1)
localVarPath = strings.ReplaceAll(localVarPath, "{"+"incident_type_id"+"}", _neturl.PathEscape(datadog.ParameterToString(incidentTypeId, "")))
Do not call Replace with a negative limit, use ReplaceAll instead (...read more)

In Go, the strings.Replace() function is used to replace a certain substring within a string with another substring. The function takes in four parameters: the original string, the old substring to be replaced, the new substring that will replace the old one, and an integer limit dictating how many replacements to be made.

Calling strings.Replace() with a negative limit doesn't really make sense. According to the Go documentation, if limit is negative, there is no limit on the number of replacements. Which means it will replace all instances of old substring in the original string with a new substring.

For example:

fmt.Println(strings.Replace("oink oink oink", "k", "ky", -2))

In this example, Replace returns a copy of the string "oink oink oink" where "k" is replaced by "ky" everywhere it appears, because limit is -2.

So it's not necessarily "incorrect" to use a negative limit, but it can create misunderstandings in your code. It's best to use a limit of -1 when you want to replace all instances, as this convention is more commonly understood to mean "no limit".

But if you specifically want to avoid using negative limit for Replace or looking for replace method with better efficiency, using strings.NewReplacer() could be a better option when there are multiple string pairs need to be replaced, where you can specify a list of old-new string pairs.

Or you can use strings.ReplaceAll(). It is equivalent to Replace with a limit of -1. It's arguably clearer and more self-explanatory than using a negative limit with strings.Replace().

For example:

fmt.Println(strings.ReplaceAll("oink oink oink", "o", "ky"))

It replaces all instances of "o" in the string "oink oink oink" by "ky".

View in Datadog  Leave us feedback  Documentation

@api-clients-generation-pipeline api-clients-generation-pipeline bot changed the title [INA-6366] Integrate incident types into Incidents API documentation Integrate incident types into Incidents API documentation Oct 23, 2024
@api-clients-generation-pipeline api-clients-generation-pipeline bot added the changelog/Added Added features results into a minor version bump label Oct 23, 2024
@api-clients-generation-pipeline api-clients-generation-pipeline bot force-pushed the datadog-api-spec/generated/3172 branch from 39f2e63 to 041641a Compare October 23, 2024 14:09
@api-clients-generation-pipeline api-clients-generation-pipeline bot force-pushed the datadog-api-spec/generated/3172 branch from 041641a to 2914db4 Compare October 24, 2024 17:06
// but it doesn't guarantee that properties required by API are set.
func NewIncidentTypeAttributesWithDefaults() *IncidentTypeAttributes {
this := IncidentTypeAttributes{}
var isDefault bool = false

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🔵 Code Quality Violation

Suggested change
var isDefault bool = false
var isDefault = false
redundant type declaration (...read more)

In Go, it is considered good practice to avoid declaring the type when it is obvious or when the type can be inferred from the assignment. This is known as type inference, and it offers several benefits:

  1. Readability: By omitting the explicit type declaration, the code becomes more concise and easier to read. Redundant type declarations can clutter the code and introduce unnecessary noise. When the type is obvious from the assigned value, omitting the type declaration can improve code readability and make it more expressive.
  2. Flexibility and maintainability: Using type inference allows for easier changes to the underlying type without manually updating every instance where it is declared. If the type needs to be changed in the future, you only need to modify the assignment, and Go's type inference mechanism will handle the rest. This reduces the maintenance effort required and improves code maintainability.
  3. Clean code appearance: Omitting the type declaration when it is obvious results in cleaner code syntax. Code that is free from excessive explicit type declarations tends to look more elegant and consistent. It minimizes redundancy and focuses on the essential logic, contributing to a cleaner and more streamlined codebase.
  4. Compatibility: Go's type inference mechanism ensures compatibility with future changes to the type of the assigned value. If the assigned value is changed to a type-compatible value, the code will continue to compile and run without any modifications. This allows for flexibility in your code while maintaining correctness.

That being said, it is important to strike a balance and avoid excessive use of type inference. Clear and explicit type declarations are still valuable when they enhance code clarity, such as when documenting or expressing the intent of the code. It is essential to find the right balance between brevity and clarity in your codebase.

By utilizing Go's type inference mechanism and avoiding explicit type declarations when the type is obvious, you can achieve more readable, maintainable, and concise code that adheres to Go's idiomatic style.

View in Datadog  Leave us feedback  Documentation

@api-clients-generation-pipeline api-clients-generation-pipeline bot force-pushed the datadog-api-spec/generated/3172 branch 3 times, most recently from 5d17d4b to e651aa8 Compare October 28, 2024 12:10
@api-clients-generation-pipeline api-clients-generation-pipeline bot force-pushed the datadog-api-spec/generated/3172 branch from e651aa8 to 450851d Compare October 28, 2024 23:09
@api-clients-generation-pipeline api-clients-generation-pipeline bot merged commit e413315 into master Oct 29, 2024
12 checks passed
@api-clients-generation-pipeline api-clients-generation-pipeline bot deleted the datadog-api-spec/generated/3172 branch October 29, 2024 13:21
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 29, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
changelog/Added Added features results into a minor version bump
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant