-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.2k
[OptionResolver] Document the OptionConfigurator #12426
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
[OptionResolver] Document the OptionConfigurator #12426
Conversation
…define options with fluent interface (lmillucci, yceruto) This PR was merged into the 5.1-dev branch. Discussion ---------- [OptionsResolver] Add new OptionConfigurator class to define options with fluent interface | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | master | Bug fix? | no | New feature? | yes | Deprecations? | no | Tickets | Fix #33735 | License | MIT | Doc PR | symfony/symfony-docs#12426 - [x] submit changes to the documentation This PR adds OptionConfigurator to the OptionsResolver Commits ------- 1ff5640 [OptionsResolver] Add new OptionConfigurator class to define options with fluent interface
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.
Hi @lmillucci!
This is a great new syntax! Is there any drawback to using this new signature? I'm asking because if there is no drawback (performance wise or the like), we should imho use this new signature everywhere in this document. A superior syntax should be preferred over the old setters :)
If you agree, but don't have the time/motivation/whatever to do it, please leave a comment and I'll take care for it while merging this PR.
Thanks!
I don't think there are any drawback in this signature.
I don't think I will have time to work on this until next weekend so if you
want to do this in the meantime you can work on it :)
Il dom 9 feb 2020, 16:43 Wouter J <notifications@github.com> ha scritto:
… ***@***.**** approved this pull request.
Hi @lmillucci <https://github.com/lmillucci>!
This is a great new syntax! Is there any drawback to using this new
signature? I'm asking because if there is no drawback (performance wise or
the like), we should imho use this new signature everywhere in this
document. A superior syntax should be preferred over the old setters :)
If you agree, but don't have the time/motivation/whatever to do it, please
leave a comment and I'll take care for it while merging this PR.
Thanks!
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#12426?email_source=notifications&email_token=ABLXDXAZ4QZDXQFFXFAAUI3RCAQAPA5CNFSM4I5XAG2KYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFWFIHK3DMKJSXC5LFON2FEZLWNFSXPKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOCUZEE7Y#pullrequestreview-355615359>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABLXDXGF3LRCZSNPHHECGIDRCAQAPANCNFSM4I5XAG2A>
.
|
Meanwhile, a new |
this is the link #13090 |
658a0f5
to
921c73f
Compare
Thanks for your work on this new feature! |
…lucci) This PR was squashed before being merged into the master branch. Discussion ---------- [OptionResolver] Document the OptionConfigurator Add `define()` method to OptionResolver to enhance readability of option configuration. See symfony/symfony#33848 Commits ------- 921c73f [OptionResolver] Document the OptionConfigurator
@yceruto to not get this PR rotten, I merged the current state 👍 |
Add
define()
method to OptionResolver to enhance readability of option configuration. See symfony/symfony#33848