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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Prebid Core: refactor bidderSettings to have only one entry point #7712
Prebid Core: refactor bidderSettings to have only one entry point #7712
Changes from 5 commits
1282769
2a45317
1d71442
19966d0
057dbc9
b0d9ca6
284ab3a
5e4c268
152296a
5abbe1b
f6c7468
0a30d07
a7f28f5
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is potentially a breaking change: previously, this would be evaluated the first time this function was called with
mediaType === 'video'
and would sethb_cache_host
globally after that. There was also no fallback tobidderSettings.standard
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Breaking change... more like a bug fix!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Another potentially breaking change: the logic here was a bit confusing, copying
sendStandardTargeting
only ifadserverTargeting
is defined, which was also overridingstandard.sendStandardTargeting
. From the public documentation it seems like we should be using thestandard
setting if there is no bidder-specific one.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not big fan of OOP concept.
Looking at various modules in pbjs we barely use OOP concept.
In modules we have exported functions (that can be used in other modules/bidders) and private functions that are used only inside that module.
To me it looks much cleaner this way. But, this isn't hard requirement from my side, if you feel OOP is a way to go, I won't object.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there a reason to not using Class if you choose OOP?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Because when I started working on this IE11 was still a target :) I don't have a strong preference on the syntax, I can rewrite using
class
- should I take your comment as an encouragement?Then some day I'll have to explain to you why you're wrong.
But more seriously, I don't understand how you can say we barely use OOP - config, auctionManager, auction, adapterManager, adapters, etc are all objects with capabilities. Is the problem that I use
prototype
instead of hidden closures as "private" methods? or the fact that you have to usenew
for this function but not for the others?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, totally :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I just learned that there is already a
mergeDeep
in here. I'll post a revision early next week to slim this down some.