Conversation
Contributor
|
I like the getter :) Makes me much happier about looking at this code haha |
WesTyler
approved these changes
Jul 25, 2017
Contributor
Collaborator
Author
|
#1209 is specific to options, there was a broader one. |
Collaborator
Author
|
And for the record, I'm not really satisfied with the complexity of this solution, but it's the best I could come up with. |
Collaborator
Author
|
@WesTyler @DavidTPate think this one is good to go ? |
Contributor
|
I like it |
|
This thread has been automatically locked due to inactivity. Please open a new issue for related bugs or questions following the new issue template instructions. |
|
This thread has been automatically locked due to inactivity. Please open a new issue for related bugs or questions following the new issue template instructions. |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Here's a feature that has been requested previously (sorry can't find the issues) and I've been thinking about how to expose it, so this PR is my proposal. Let me know what you think.
I know accessing the_typeis meh, but I doubt it will change and doingschema instanceof Joi.object().constructoris a bit tedious. Maybe type could be exposed through a getter...