-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
ListClient by product #190
Conversation
Codecov ReportBase: 64.67% // Head: 64.70% // Increases project coverage by
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #190 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 64.67% 64.70% +0.02%
- Complexity 610 613 +3
============================================
Files 108 109 +1
Lines 2058 2068 +10
Branches 222 223 +1
============================================
+ Hits 1331 1338 +7
- Misses 652 654 +2
- Partials 75 76 +1
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
} else { | ||
Product product = ParserUtil.parseProduct(argumentMultimap.getValue(PREFIX_PRODUCT).get()); | ||
return new ListClientCommand(client -> client.hasProduct(product)); | ||
} |
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.
It might be better to pass the product straight to the ListClientCommand and then form the predicate inside the command itself. IMO, the parser classes should be concerned with parsing only (i.e. turning the argument strings into the command).
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.
LGTM
No description provided.