-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 89
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
Remove unnecessary options structs #390
Conversation
apps/public/public.go
Outdated
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
// Client is a representation of authentication client for public applications as defined in the | ||
// package doc. For more information, visit https://docs.microsoft.com/azure/active-directory/develop/msal-client-applications. | ||
type Client struct { | ||
base base.Client | ||
accessor cache.ExportReplace |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
most of these are in common with confidential client.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There are ways we could share these fields but I haven't thought of one that's really better than duplicating them. We could for example move the common fields onto a new type and have constructor options set them there. However, accommodating options not shared between client types would then be difficult and more complex than duplicating the common fields.
SonarCloud Quality Gate failed. 0 Bugs No Coverage information |
Part of #380. This removes the options bags for methods and constructors from the public API. These types are useless in application code because they aren't input to any function (applications set options by calling functions like
WithAuthority()
instead). They could conceivably be used in unusual test scenarios as part of a fake MSAL however, because these types distract from the real options API, I think we shouldn't export them before seeing a clear need for them; doing so would be non-breaking.