commandline: Refactor and streamline special syntaxes #2264
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Geod24
force-pushed
the
minor-refactor
branch
2 times, most recently
from
c9a9e05 to
05e4d41
Compare
All those special syntaxes only trigger if args.length >= 2, so first we can nest them in a new scope, which also makes it visually more distinct. Additionally, the third and second cases were actually inverted: if the third case was to pass, it means the second case couldn't have passed (because they check present/absence of an extension, respectively), so we can swap them and use an else-if. The result is arguably much more readable, and highlight the fact that if the first case (stdin) is used, the second case will.
|
So all the cases were actually dependent on each other. I hope the new code is clearer. |
thewilsonator
approved these changes
Jun 13, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
All those special syntaxes only trigger if args.length >= 2,
so first we can nest them in a new scope, which also makes
it visually more distinct.
Additionally, the third and second cases were actually inverted:
if the third case was to pass, it means the second case couldn't
have passed (because they check present/absence of an extension,
respectively), so we can swap them and use an else-if.
The result is arguably much more readable.