Skip to content

Update Switch and Data parameter completion #17684

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
MartinGC94 wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update Switch and Data parameter completion #17684

MartinGC94 wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

@MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor

@MartinGC94 MartinGC94 commented Jul 14, 2022

PR Summary

Updates the switch parameter completion to:

  • Make it more reliable (Some editing scenarios would prevent completions from showing up)
  • Add tooltips to explain the different options
  • Remove duplicates and conflicting options from the completion results

I've included the "-Exact" switch parameter for the Switch completion just like how it works today, but should it be removed? -Exact is the default behavior so there's no point in suggesting it and even though the tooltip now explains it there's still a chance people misunderstand it.
I removed the Parallel parameter since it only works with workflows and workflows has been removed, I assume that's alright?

Adds completion for the supportedCommand parameter for the data keyword.

Updates the ErrorStatementAst that is created when parsing an incomplete Data section to include the statement kind and any provided flags to bring it up to parity with the ErrorStatementAst created by the Switch.

PR Context

PR Checklist

@MartinGC94 MartinGC94 requested a review from daxian-dbw as a code owner July 14, 2022 18:27
@iSazonov iSazonov added the CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log label Jul 15, 2022
@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

iSazonov commented Jul 15, 2022

@MartinGC94 The PR is marked as Large. Please split the PR on some small. I hope it is possible.d.

I removed the Parallel parameter since it only works with workflows and workflows has been removed, I assume that's alright?

Yes, workflows were removed.

@MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor Author

MartinGC94 commented Jul 15, 2022

The PR is marked as Large. Please split the PR on some small. I hope it is possible.

IMO it doesn't make sense to split it. It's just one big method + a few minor changes to the parser and completion analysis to make that method work.

@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Jul 22, 2022
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jul 22, 2022

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@fflaten fflaten mentioned this pull request Jul 28, 2022
Merged
22 tasks
@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated
Copy link

pull-request-quantifier-deprecated bot commented May 2, 2023

This PR has 239 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

Quantification details 

Label      : Large
Size       : +171 -68
Percentile : 63.9%

Total files changed: 5

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +113 -68
.resx : +34 -0
.ps1 : +24 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw Awaiting requested review from daxian-dbw daxian-dbw is a code owner

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

@adityapatwardhan adityapatwardhan

Labels

CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log Large Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@MartinGC94 @iSazonov @adityapatwardhan