Refactor constructors of ModelElement #2828
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
srawlins
approved these changes
Oct 6, 2021
Member
srawlins
left a comment
srawlins
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice! Mostly mechanical, but I like the new structure.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This makes the constructors for ModelElement private, and makes use of a separate builder that can be overridden in tests or otherwise be plugged-in via mocks or fake objects.
I think this is an overall improvement, but there might be something more extensive we could do that would achieve the same result.
If this works out, I'll do the same thing for ElementType, the other constructor that follows the original pattern.