Inline nested visitor class into getVisitor() - #147
Merged
Conversation
Declare the visitor anonymously inside the `Preconditions.check(..)` call rather than as a named nested class.
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Declares
MigrateRequestConfigVisitoranonymously inside thePreconditions.check(..)call instead of as a namedprivate staticnested class, keeping the visitor next to the recipe metadata that configures it.InlineNestedVisitorClassrecipe deliberately does not touch precondition-wrapped visitors yet — inlining a large one underPreconditions.check(..)can hurt readability, so it is only applied here where the visitor is small enough (~70 lines) for the tradeoff to be worth it. The pattern is left alone in the other repos for now.Beyond the class declaration the diff is a pure re-indent;
./gradlew buildpasses.