Support windows command resolution #1290
Conversation
|
Thanks for the pull request! Here is what will happen next:
Thank you for contributing! |
| if current_candidate.is_file() { | ||
| return Some(current_candidate); | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Like in Ruby, the last line of a function is the return value in Rust. Short-circuiting the function with return Some(T) on 228 is great, but we should fall through to a None below this line. That would allow you to remove the ; on 233 & the explicit call to return None on 232.
These are small suggestions but they'll make the function control flow read a bit easier and be more "rust-like"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Definitely appreciate the feedback on making it more rust-like!
| @@ -201,13 +201,39 @@ pub fn find_command(command: &str) -> Option<PathBuf> { | |||
| if candidate.is_file() { | |||
| return Some(candidate); | |||
| } | |||
| else { | |||
| match find_command_with_pathext(&candidate) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The match here would be unnecessary if the ; on line 202 was removed along with the None on line 211. find_command_with_pathext already returns an Option so if you just call that without the ; appended to the end you'll get the return value you're looking for!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the feedback!
I think that would only work for the first path in the path variable checked. The second part of the match None => {} is what lets things proceed on to the next path to check.
I'm going to write some tests to validate the behavior.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nope, you're right. I looked quick and didn't notice we were in an iterator and trying to short-circuit out of it in this function as well
smurawski
force-pushed
the
smurawski/win_studio
branch
3 times, most recently
from
1c2a421
to
2ab1c98
Compare
Signed-off-by: Steven Murawski <steven.murawski@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Murawski <steven.murawski@gmail.com>
smurawski
force-pushed
the
smurawski/win_studio
branch
2 times, most recently
from
093fab6
to
d032ac1
Compare
|
@reset I've made some changes to the structure and behavior and added a bunch of tests. Mind giving it another 👀 ? |
| @@ -199,7 +241,13 @@ pub fn find_command(command: &str) -> Option<PathBuf> { | |||
| for path in env::split_paths(&paths) { | |||
| let candidate = PathBuf::from(&path).join(command); | |||
| if candidate.is_file() { | |||
| println!("Found {:?}", candidate); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks like it's either debug output or something left over from iterating. If it's debug output let's use debug!() instead of println!() and if it's just left over from iterating remove it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, thought I killed all those. I'll remove it.
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| #[cfg(target_os="windows")] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What a neat way to group tests in a platform dependent way. I hadn't seen us use submodules in a test module yet but this is a nice pattern
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I started using the modules as a way to group the tests to keep the function names shorter, but it became handy when I needed to make one windows only :)
Signed-off-by: Steven Murawski <steven.murawski@gmail.com>
smurawski
force-pushed
the
smurawski/win_studio
branch
from
d032ac1
to
82af3ad
Compare
|
@thesentinels approve |
|
🤘 I am testing your branch against master before merging it. We do this to ensure that the master branch is never failing tests. |
|
|
Travis CI has
|
💖 Travis CI reports this PR passed. It always makes me feel nice when humans approve of one anothers work. I'm merging this PR now. I just want you and the contributor to answer me one question:
|
|
progress on #1192 |
christophermaier
added
Type: Feature
Adds search by PATHEXT extensions to the command search of PATH.
Signed-off-by: Steven Murawski steven.murawski@gmail.com