Added support for PrefixableCommandInterface #1262
Merged
Conversation
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
Member
|
How is this related to #1235? |
Contributor
Author
|
@tillkruss With this changes, we don't need anymore to specify commands within |
tillkruss
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 13, 2023
* Added support for PrefixableCommandInterface * Codestyle fixes
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This changes brings more structure and decoupling between commands and
KeyPrefixProcessor. It's makes easy to maintain commands code and introduce new commands, so it's enough for command to implementPrefixableCommandInterfaceto make it passes throughKeyPrefixProcessor