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

Remove calls to supports and supports back to back #23077

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 10, 2024

Conversation

kbrock
Copy link
Member

@kbrock kbrock commented Jul 1, 2024

Part of (extracted from):

No reason to call the same block twice.

This is probably pedantic.
Typically, the value of the first call would be cached for the second call.
But getting away from the duplicate calls is preferred.

This came about because I found a few supports calls that had a return and I saw these missing.

@kbrock kbrock requested review from agrare and Fryguy as code owners July 1, 2024 22:10
@kbrock kbrock mentioned this pull request Jul 1, 2024
17 tasks
kbrock added 3 commits July 8, 2024 16:06
This condenses the logic and avoids calling supports and unsupports for the same key
Use a variable to avoid calling supports and unsupported reason on the same code
@kbrock kbrock force-pushed the supports_unsupports-drop_supports branch from 11a1ddd to c0f9c8e Compare July 8, 2024 20:06
@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Jul 8, 2024

Checked commits kbrock/manageiq@7d390c3~...c0f9c8e with ruby 3.1.5, rubocop 1.56.3, haml-lint 0.51.0, and yamllint
6 files checked, 0 offenses detected
Everything looks fine. 🍰

@kbrock
Copy link
Member Author

kbrock commented Jul 8, 2024

update:

  • rebased (fixed master build so kicking this)

@agrare agrare merged commit 0937672 into ManageIQ:master Jul 10, 2024
8 checks passed
@kbrock kbrock deleted the supports_unsupports-drop_supports branch July 10, 2024 17:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants