Accessor overwrite warnings no longer print if functions are identical #44
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thanks for the pull request. At first glance this looks good, but I'm running a bit behind right now. I will try to check it more thoroughly, get it merged, and a patch release put out this weekend. If nothing happens and early next week rolls around, feel free to ping me :) Thanks, |
|
No rush, no worries. Thanks for taking a look n' things! |
|
This is now included in the 0.6.3 release. Thanks again for the contribution. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Added an identity check before printing accessor overwrite warnings, since replacing a function with the exact same function is not really an overwrite. ;)
The short "why": I ran into a case where I couldn't easily switch to "boolean mode" when defining
min,max, etc. since I'm constructing a reducer dynamically based on some other stuff. My attempts to circumvent the warnings got pretty ugly, and I figure an upstream PR wouldn't hurt.While there, I also fixed a couple of items that seemed incorrect ('median' instead of 'min'/'max' in warning text and the wrong variable checked for exceptionCount). My apologies for not including them in a separate commit.