Refactor the class method validation logic #39
Merged
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
anuragshopify
force-pushed
the
validation
branch
from
dce1f92
to
be2dfa7
Compare
GustavoCaso
reviewed
Aug 1, 2019
|
Thanks for working on this ❤️ I left a message for you to review. |
anuragshopify
force-pushed
the
validation
branch
from
be2dfa7
to
4876a28
Compare
This method is really looking at definition level stuff i.e whether the job class has the necessary methods and the method declarations are correct. As such, I think having this sort of check in the constructor meakes more sense. This also updates all the tests accordingly. If this isn't the case/there's a case for not having it in the constructor we can just use a boolean to not re-check the signatures on every invocation of `perform`.
anuragshopify
force-pushed
the
validation
branch
from
4876a28
to
82e40c0
Compare
GustavoCaso
approved these changes
Aug 2, 2019
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This is in regards to - #37
This PR moves the method signature checks (i.e
assert_implements_methods!) to the job initialization step.This method is really looking at definition level stuff i.e whether the
job class has the necessary methods and the method declarations are
correct. As such, I think having this sort of check in the constructor
makes more sense.
This also updates all the tests accordingly.
If this isn't the case/there's a case for not having it in the
constructor we can just use a boolean to not re-check the signatures on
every invocation of
perform.