Code cleaning: using enum where possible #17352
Conversation
Arthur-Milchior
force-pushed
the
else
branch
2 times, most recently
from
8e1aabe to
eb5a248
Compare
|
Could you split this into a few smaller PRs (~2/300 lines each)? This isn't going to be easy to review otherwise, especially as it's low priority. The first commit in the series uses single variable names for a class (
I believe it was an AOSP standard for many years. |
david-allison
added
the
Needs Author Reply
Arthur-Milchior
force-pushed
the
else
branch
from
eb5a248 to
04e228a
Compare
|
@david-allison done |
|
Tests fail on this one |
When `when` is used on an enum, the `else ->` can always be transformed into a complete enumeration of the enum's entries. This ensure that each time a new entry is added, there is a warning and the developer must decide whether or not a change is needed. While the `else` may hide some required change. So, for the sake of future developement, I removed `else ->` when it makes sense. I should note that I kept some `else ->` when the `when` consider only a very small part of all possible enum value, in order to reduce the size of the code.
Arthur-Milchior
force-pushed
the
else
branch
from
04e228a to
4896740
Compare
|
Hello 👋, this PR has had no activity for more than 2 weeks and needs a reply from the author. If you think this is a mistake please comment and ping a maintainer to get this merged ASAP! Thanks for contributing! You have 7 days until this gets closed automatically |
Arthur-Milchior
removed
Needs Author Reply
|
Actually needed to be closed, everything was merged in separate PR |
2 participants
This PR (quite simplified compared to first version), replace some else -> by an exhaustive constant list. This will ensure that if more enum are added, we won't forget to consider all enums