Repository navigation
Add similar extraction occurrence count #947
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
Open
mcepl
wants to merge
1
commit into
master
Choose a base branch
from
issue-168-extract-match-count
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+67
−7
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
Rather than adding an API that's specific to just extract-similar refactoring, I was actually thinking that this should be more of a general-purpose API to ask the refactoring class to compute a preview object.
An API that could be used, for example, for rename/extract similar operation to preview how many files/occurrences would be affected, listing valid target scopes where extract operation would or could place the extracted method/variable, previewing the function arguments of extract method, how many occurrences would be affected by inline refactoring, how many things organise import would remove/move, etc, without fully calculating the changeset. Integrations could display these info in the UI so users can make more informed decision before performing them, or they could use it to enable/disable actions like
similarthat doesn't always make sense.The availability of what info is available is of course going to be specific to each operation, but the API for requesting these preview information objects should have a somewhat consistent contract between different refactoring operations.
I think the implementation here for
get_similar_occurrences()looks fine but the API should be left undocumented and considered private for now until we can sketch out the API contract in a separate ticket. I'd approve the PR if we leave out the documentation for now.