Introduce FluxCollectToImmutableSet Refaster rule
#571
Conversation
|
Looks good. No mutations were possible for these changes. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the PR @mlrprananta 🚀 !
In our OSS repo we try to avoid linking to "internal" things or repositories, so updated the description :).
Made small tweaks to the suggested commit message 😄.
| @@ -377,6 +377,10 @@ Flux<Integer> testFluxFilterSortWithComparator() { | |||
| return Flux.just(1, 4, 3, 2).sort(reverseOrder()).filter(i -> i % 2 == 0); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| Mono<ImmutableSet<Integer>> testFluxCollectToImmutableSet() { | |||
| return Flux.just(1, 4, 3, 2).collect(toImmutableList()).map(ImmutableSet::copyOf); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On a second thought, let's simplify the numbers here. I think it makes sense to have 1, 2 as we are collecting and "usually" there will be multiple values to collect. The order used in the test above is important to the method that is used.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we also simplify for #570?
|
Looks good. No mutations were possible for these changes. |
Stephan202
force-pushed
the
mlrprananta/flux-collect-toimmutableset
branch
from
7e4550e to
28de12f
Compare
|
Looks good. No mutations were possible for these changes. |
|
I hesitated with the "more" as not all were really "more contrived" 😄. |
rickie
changed the title
FluxCollectToImmutableSet refaster ruleFluxCollectToImmutableSet Refaster rule
Idea is based on an internal GH thread.
Suggested commit message: