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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Refactor SafeAttributePersistenceProvider and AttributePersistenceProvider to move ember-specific bits to codegendatamodelprovider #36476
Refactor SafeAttributePersistenceProvider and AttributePersistenceProvider to move ember-specific bits to codegendatamodelprovider #36476
Changes from all commits
4b94904
c26c9f0
64d9acf
80e826b
4fe03be
6ffb911
f387b7b
964cf5b
c0ee99d
7d421d0
dfbf1d5
770d7b2
498268e
fd485fe
3e91e55
59de647
4cfc7a2
cd67f5a
9b100f5
944e910
efc0391
9790c14
9f4da18
b2f16b7
66861cf
22e9875
9388a04
43372b9
2483cd7
76272de
aa88e5d
a7be8c3
e325098
35db533
7cad7d6
b4f465f
60d388d
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
No, the whole point of SafeAttributePersistenceProvider is that it's an interface, which can be implemented however is convenient to the application, no? In particular, it might not be implemented on top of PersistentStorageDelegate at all (and probably shouldn't be; constraints on PersistentStorageDelegate mean that in some situations you in fact cannot build SafeAttributePersistenceProvider on top of PersistentStorageDelegate).
I'm stopping here, since this seems like a pretty fundamental issue. So just to be clear:
DefaultAttributePersistenceProvider
, but that's a TODO/bug to fix, not something to reify in our API surface.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.
Following up offline to figure out an approach here. This is what we have today (has a very organic-grown feel to it):