feat: add custom field clean method #62
Open
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
To unmarshal json correctly change the custom fields struct. See TestRemoveIDCustomField for marshalling details.
Rewrite CustomFields method to use more idiomatic go style code. Use new version of the CustomFieldValue struct. Test actualization.
mehanizm
changed the title
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #62 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 73.25% 77.88% +4.62%
==========================================
Files 21 21
Lines 890 850 -40
==========================================
+ Hits 652 662 +10
+ Misses 206 156 -50
Partials 32 32
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 PR has three commits that need the review.
feat: add RemoveIDCustomField methodIn this commit I've added the method to delete (only clear) custom field of the card by its ID (see "Clearing CustomFieldItems" here).
But there was a problem. Because of the definition of the
Valuefield in theCustomFieldItemresult from the API was not parsed correctly.I'd tried to understand why we need here (in general purpose library) so complex unmarshaling with some kind of the business logic and stuck with that. There are no tests to explain this.
impr: change custom fields value structTo develop this idea I've simplified
CustomFieldItemstruct and all corresponding methods. No tests was broken after that, only type actualization.impr: refactor CustomFields methodAs a result I've refactor
CustomFieldscard method to use more idiomatic go code and new simplifiedCustomFieldItemstruct.Conclusion
I think, that it is more correct style for the general library and type casting from the
CustomFieldItemValueshould be done in the business logic on the application level. The casting logic that was here earlier is hard to understand and did not have general application.