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

WebResponseObject.Common merge partials atomic commits #18703

Merged

Conversation

CarloToso
Copy link
Contributor

PR Summary

Merge partial classes in WebResponseObject.Common, rearrange Properties and Methods in alphabetical order and RawContentStream to auto-implemented property.

PR Context

Justification: // TODO: Merge Partials
Replaces #18692

}

private MemoryStream _rawContentStream;
public MemoryStream RawContentStream { get; protected set; }
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why the change to protected?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I followed the same convention as :

public byte[] Content { get; protected set; }

and

public string RawContent { get; protected set; }

Copy link
Collaborator

@iSazonov iSazonov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM with two comments.

{
get { return (WebResponseHelper.GetStatusDescription(BaseResponse)); }
}
[SuppressMessage("Microsoft.Performance", "CA1819:PropertiesShouldNotReturnArrays")]
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Eh, this rule is not active in the repo today so we can remove the line.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

done

@@ -178,21 +118,23 @@ private void InitializeRawContent(HttpResponseMessage baseResponse)
this.RawContent = raw.ToString();
}

private static bool IsPrintable(char c) => char.IsLetterOrDigit(c) || char.IsPunctuation(c) || char.IsSeparator(c) || char.IsSymbol(c) || char.IsWhiteSpace(c);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh, too long string. Maybe:

private static bool IsPrintable(char c)
    => char.IsLetterOrDigit(c)
    || char.IsPunctuation(c)
    || char.IsSeparator(c)
    || char.IsSymbol(c)
    || char.IsWhiteSpace(c);
`

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

done

@pull-request-quantifier
Copy link

This PR has 71 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Small
Size       : +30 -41
Percentile : 28.4%

Total files changed: 1

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +30 -41

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  👌  👎 (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@iSazonov iSazonov added the CL-CodeCleanup Indicates that a PR should be marked as a Code Cleanup change in the Change Log label Dec 2, 2022
@msftbot msftbot bot added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Dec 10, 2022
@msftbot
Copy link

msftbot bot commented Dec 10, 2022

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@msftbot msftbot bot removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Dec 13, 2022
@iSazonov iSazonov merged commit c3a080c into PowerShell:master Dec 13, 2022
40 checks passed
@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

@CarloToso Thanks!
There are some this.* prefixes which could be removed now.

@CarloToso CarloToso deleted the WebResponseObject.Common-merge-partials2 branch December 13, 2022 22:00
@msftbot
Copy link

msftbot bot commented Dec 20, 2022

🎉v7.4.0-preview.1 has been released which incorporates this pull request.🎉

Handy links:

CarloToso added a commit to CarloToso/PowerShell that referenced this pull request Jan 15, 2023
gregsdennis pushed a commit to gregsdennis/PowerShell that referenced this pull request Mar 15, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CL-CodeCleanup Indicates that a PR should be marked as a Code Cleanup change in the Change Log Small
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants