Value handling cleanup #2486
Open
Value handling cleanup #2486
Conversation
This file contains 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 PR has several fixes to value handling.
CliCommand.Addmethod (philosophically opposed to needing to step through code to understand a call stack, and this caused me a longer than necessary debugging session)ValueSources to more palatable namesValueSources. This may require discussion.TryGetValueto PipelineResultGetValue. Do we want to mimic dictionaries and use an indexer for throw semanticsFallbackValueSourcefor default values, unifying these similar conceptsValueProvidercachingAlso, on calculated values, Chet found a couple more that I plan to discuss on Friday but can move forward if needed.
Both because it was easier, and because I wanted to ensure we retained our experience with the currently rejected approach to custom type handling (calculated values here, but we are planning to instead use custom type conversions in core) I backed calculated values out in a commit in this PR.