This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 19, 2021. It is now read-only.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Refactor WalkTrie #135
Refactor WalkTrie #135
Changes from 4 commits
480a072
f4bddd4
f4c6493
a536e12
910be32
3a7fe21
9275cc3
7e7780d
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
could you elaborate more here, it's a little confusing that an underscore-prefixed method would need to be kept around for backwards compatibility, do you think others are using this that would lead to a breaking change if removed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We can drop it, but this changes the function signature of the library and would thus imply a major release? It was not officially marked as
private
. But I doubt any external user is using it.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
makes sense thanks, we can see what @holgerd77 thinks, i'm fine either way 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I think it might make sense to keep this for now - judging from our own loose usage pattern of private methods (we might actually want to give this topic some more structured thought respectively it likely makes sense to think this a bit along once one stumbles upon a private method used to raise the question: why are we actually doing this and can we a) achieve the same goal in a way using the public API or b) is the public API of the library used not sufficient and should we additionally expose something there? Doesn't need to be solved "on site" but can also very well lead to a new issue)
For now I've opened a new
v5
planning issue #136 where we can collect breaking-change wishes as well as deprecation tasks and have added the_walkTrie()
removal as a TODO. One step in the direction that we generally get to a bit more structured on major release planning.