Skip to content
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

Fix corner case for glHelper #365

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Mar 8, 2016
Merged

Fix corner case for glHelper #365

merged 6 commits into from
Mar 8, 2016

Conversation

alexandernst
Copy link
Collaborator

Make glHelper honor equal argument.

@alexandernst
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I think this is done @obeliskos @techfort
Ready for a review!

@NachE
Copy link

NachE commented Mar 2, 2016

Hi! How about the status of this pull? I find this code useful for my project

@obeliskos
Copy link
Collaborator

Hey, sorry it has taken me so long to get around to this... time has been limited.

I see what you are doing there, and I never saw !! type coercion before, but seeing as though this is internal helper only, it would probably be best to replace all calling functions which omit this 'equal' param and pass proper 'false' value to method call to correctly initialize parameters.

I realize you probably wanted to keep scope simpler but if we can eek out a millisecond here or there by not doing type coercion then I would rather just make sure the method is properly invoked.

Either you do that, or I can do it and I assume your new specs will start passing as well?

@alexandernst
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@obeliskos No problem!

Please do, I'm short of time today. Indeed, making sure everything is false instead of doing !!will make things a little bit faster.

And yes, specs will pass once this is merged.

@alexandernst
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@obeliskos A had some spare time today, so I updated the code as you requested 👍

@obeliskos
Copy link
Collaborator

Ah, i did that yesterday after you saying for me to go ahead and do that.

Was there anything else in the p.r. aside from 'equal' param handling? I figured the #366 would be where maybe you needed to update something since it still does not pass.

Let me know where these stand at the moment... Thanks!

@obeliskos
Copy link
Collaborator

If there are other minor changes needed to these helpers, can you add those changes to #366 instead? Confusing dealing with these separately... thanks.

@alexandernst
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Ah, sorry, I thought you hadn't done it yet.

The equal param was the only missing thing. Tests dont pass yet since this
PR isn't merged. Once this PR is merged, I'll trigger a restart in Travis
in #366.
El El mar, 8 mar 2016 a las 2:17, obeliskos notifications@github.com
escribió:

If there are other minor changes needed to these helpers, can you add
those changes to #366 #366
instead? Confusing dealing with these separately... thanks.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#365 (comment).

@obeliskos
Copy link
Collaborator

Please make your equal param change within #366 itself. Feels like these two (dependent) pr's should have been a single one to begin with. With that done and passing I would pass it and just close this one.

@alexandernst
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@obeliskos Just the equal param change won't make #366 pass. This entire PR is required for #366 to pass. Do you want me to cherry-pick all the commits that are here in #366?

@obeliskos
Copy link
Collaborator

It would appear you would need to maybe cherry pick two lines of code? Am I missing anything? Its split out into so many sub-commits its hard to get a grand 'diff compared to master' report.

Wouldn't everything else be redundant with 7e7303a ?

@obeliskos
Copy link
Collaborator

Ok looks like you can append ".diff" to the url of any github PR url to get a comprehensive diff of the (whole) PR compared to (master?). Seems it still is comparing old version of master though since many of the changes have already been changed.

Still its clean enough I could commit this if you prefer.

@alexandernst
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@obeliskos To see a full diff of this branch compared to master, just use https://github.com/techfort/LokiJS/pull/365/files

Yes, committing this should make green #366

@obeliskos
Copy link
Collaborator

That view is even better, thanks.

Yea I'm guessing maybe you haven't merged recent commit into this pr so its showing some redundant fixes which are already in master but it should merge well enough.

obeliskos added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 8, 2016
@obeliskos obeliskos merged commit c31942f into techfort:master Mar 8, 2016
@alexandernst alexandernst mentioned this pull request Mar 8, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants