refactor: clarify filter func return val meaning #2958
Conversation
This file contains 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
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2958 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 77.79% 77.86% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 89 89
Lines 10515 10515
==========================================
+ Hits 8180 8188 +8
+ Misses 1845 1837 -8
Partials 490 490
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚨 Try these New Features:
|
WofWca
force-pushed
the
refactor-clarify-filter-predicate
branch
from
e77b481
to
329ddf1
Compare
|
CI failures seem unrelated? |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Description
This should it easier to understand whether you're supposed to return
trueorfalse.I know it's pretty much the standard that
trueis forkeep, but this is a simple change that should make developers think less.The same change probably should be implemented for pion/ice, where these functions are actually invoked.
Reference issue
No