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

Update stencil to 0.11.0 #83

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Apr 11, 2018
Merged

Update stencil to 0.11.0 #83

merged 4 commits into from
Apr 11, 2018

Conversation

djbe
Copy link
Member

@djbe djbe commented Apr 9, 2018

Fixes #74.
Also includes a tiny SwiftLint update, and CocoaPods 1.5.0.

@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ open class StencilSwiftTemplate: Template {
super.init(templateString: templateStringWithMarkedNewlines, environment: environment, name: name)
}

// swiftlint:disable:next discouraged_optional_collection
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Might be a suggestion/PR for Stencil to change that method to dictionary: [String: Any] = [:] instead ;)

@@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ extension StringFiltersTests {
XCTFail("Code did succeed while it was expected to fail for wrong option")
} catch Filters.Error.invalidOption {
// That's the expected exception we want to happen
} catch let error {
} catch {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Mmmh. I still personally prefer that to be explicit.

I don't really like the implicit let error which Swift compiler supports, feels too magic, that's why I always specify catch let error or catch let e as …, both makes the statement more understandable imho and allows consistency when you happen to have to pattern-match further like only catch specific error types

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It gives a warning if the catch let error doesn't add anything. If you want explicit, we should use catch let error as Error.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah I got that and that's not the style I want / am used to.

I'm used to catch let error without type when we catch all errors because that way you understand where that error variable is coming from, while with just catch it's just magically defined and appears from nowhere explicitly.
But I feel like catch let error as Error isn't adding much and might even be confusing, feels a bit like if let x = y as Any vs if let x = y

So overall I personally don't like the rule altogether. I would even wish there were an opposite rule forcing the presence of explicit catch let error as soon as error is used in the catch block.

.swiftlint.yml Outdated
@@ -26,6 +28,7 @@ opt_in_rules:
- sorted_imports
- trailing_closure
- unneeded_parentheses_in_closure_argument
- untyped_error_in_catch
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not a fan of this one, I prefer explicit over implicit

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

See comment above.

@djbe djbe force-pushed the feature/update-stencil branch from 24fb16c to 5969d44 Compare April 9, 2018 22:38
@djbe djbe force-pushed the feature/update-stencil branch from 5969d44 to 791708b Compare April 9, 2018 22:41
@djbe
Copy link
Member Author

djbe commented Apr 10, 2018

GTM?

@AliSoftware AliSoftware merged commit 7964b6e into master Apr 11, 2018
@AliSoftware AliSoftware deleted the feature/update-stencil branch April 11, 2018 08:27
@djbe djbe added this to the 2.5.0 milestone Oct 7, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants