ParameterizedLogging recipe fixed #162
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
|
@timtebeek please checkout this PR |
3 tasks
|
Any update on this PR @timtebeek ?? |
|
I had a quick look already, but I'm out today. The class does not yet compile, and the test fails when I fix compilation. That'll need work still |
|
Ok thanks @timtebeek |
timtebeek
approved these changes
Jul 1, 2024
|
Thanks @timtebeek |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What's changed?
Explanation of Changes:
Argument Handling:
A check is added to detect if the Marker argument is present.
If a Marker is detected, it ensures that it remains as the first argument.
Argument Reordering:
After constructing the new argument list, if a Marker is detected, it is added at the beginning of the newArgList.
Test Adjustments:
Ensure that your tests verify that the Marker argument remains in the correct position and that the logging message is parameterized correctly.
What's your motivation?
Anything in particular you'd like reviewers to focus on?
Anyone you would like to review specifically?
Have you considered any alternatives or workarounds?
Any additional context
Checklist