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

[DISCUSS] Replace unique -> isUnique and required -> isRequired #548

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 6, 2018

Conversation

timleslie
Copy link
Contributor

This implements the changes discussed in #461. Having this tangible implementation might make it easier to decide whether this is what we want.

Having seen these changes I'm in favour of making the change. Not least of all because we have a function called unique() which returns the unique values from a list. Spelling the boolean flag isUnique makes it easier to search for the different cases.

Copy link
Contributor

@jesstelford jesstelford left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Needs a changeset which does a major version bump!

Copy link
Contributor

@jesstelford jesstelford left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As discussed offline; core needs to have a major version bump due to the change in API it exposes.

@emmatown
Copy link
Member

emmatown commented Dec 6, 2018

Shouldn't they be minor bumps since these packages are on 0.x and minors on 0.x can be breaking?

@timleslie
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mitchellhamilton Yeah, they probably could be minors but I think it's probably easier to move into a 1.x.x regime so that we can make full use of the semver levels.

@timleslie timleslie merged commit f587637 into master Dec 6, 2018
@timleslie timleslie deleted the is-boolean branch December 6, 2018 23:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants