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

Refactor: use NonEmpty() instead of !IsEmpty() #14499

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 9, 2023

Conversation

systay
Copy link
Collaborator

@systay systay commented Nov 9, 2023

Description

This is not super important, but it does take it's toll. Whenever reading an if statement that is using an identifier, and we are checking that it's not empty, we write something like this:

if !to.QTable.Alias.As.IsEmpty() { ... }

The distance between the ! and the IsEmpty() is quite a few characters apart, and that forces me to do an extra mental step when reading code. I much prefer using NotEmpty for this:

if to.QTable.Alias.As.NotEmpty() { ... }

This makes the code slightly more readable, and we can use all the readability we can get.

Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Nov 9, 2023

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

  • Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

  • Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
  • New features should be documented.
  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
  • There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

  • Is this flag really necessary?
  • Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Nov 9, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v19.0.0 milestone Nov 9, 2023
@systay systay changed the title Refactor: use NonEmpty instead of !IsEmpty Refactor: use NonEmpty() instead of !IsEmpty() Nov 9, 2023
@systay systay removed NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request labels Nov 9, 2023
@arthurschreiber
Copy link
Contributor

Small nitpick: The code calls this NonEmpty, your PR description calls it NotEmpty.

@systay
Copy link
Collaborator Author

systay commented Nov 9, 2023

Small nitpick: The code calls this NonEmpty, your PR description calls it NotEmpty.

Hehe... Good point. Which one do you prefer? I think NotEmpty sounds better, don't you?

@harshit-gangal
Copy link
Member

Small nitpick: The code calls this NonEmpty, your PR description calls it NotEmpty.

Hehe... Good point. Which one do you prefer? I think NotEmpty sounds better, don't you?

doit

Copy link
Member

@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@systay systay merged commit 23bca17 into vitessio:main Nov 9, 2023
115 checks passed
@systay systay deleted the NotEmpty branch November 9, 2023 09:57
ejortegau pushed a commit to slackhq/vitess that referenced this pull request Dec 13, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Component: General Changes throughout the code base Type: Internal Cleanup
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants