refactor: use sepa_file_parser instead of camt_parser
#314
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
order the method based on their execution
use a variable to improve readability
we used a forked `camt_parser` version which was outdated. To use the `sepa_file_parser` gem we extended the mapping factory in order to keep the code impact as small as possible. NOTE: thanks to the mapping the transaction_id is now better found which caused a few spec to break due to invalid expectations. Those were removed.
janz93
force-pushed
the
chore/camt_parser
branch
from
a9edfe2 to
2ec24d8
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What changes are introduced?
Replace the
camt_parserwith thesepa_file_parserWhy are these changes introduced?
We used a forked
camt_parserversion which was outdated. Thesepa_file_parseris from the community supported which ensures the latest changesHow are these changes made?
How was it tested? (optional)
remove this section, when you don't add further information
Some code, especially infrastructure code (say HELM or Kubernetes yaml files) are harder to test. So it’s important to let the reviewer know how you tested them in case you can’t check in tests. Alternatively, you can explain to the reviewer how to test it locally if necessary. Showing the results of tests you’ve run in this section if none are visible in the diff is also very helpful.