refactor: use optional chaining for improved readability and maintained functionality #1280
Conversation
thebedigupta
requested review from
derberg,
magicmatatjahu,
jonaslagoni and
asyncapi-bot-eve
as code owners
|
By Mistake I stage this file I am really sorry for that
I used code formatter inside my local setup that why this confusion was created
Provide a detailed explanation in the file comment and remove unnecessary changes made by my code formatter.
apps/generator/cli.js
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Get back this file pls.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove unwanted comments from this file
| get: () => { | ||
| // Using ?. to check if parameters and the key exist | ||
| // This is shorter and does the same thing as the old if statements | ||
| if (this.templateConfig.parameters?.[key] == null) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here there's one condition also exists !self.templateConfig.parameters pls. add that also in validation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please check PR description where I mention the issue that I solved in this PR sonarcloud highlight the issue that Prefer using an optional chain expression instead, as it's more concise and easier to read. that's what I did if i implement one more codition !self.templateConfig.parameters then this PR makes no sense here I hope you understand
This change makes the code more concise and easier to read while maintaining the same functionality. It checks if either the parameters object doesn't exist or if the specific key is not defined within it.
remove any unnecessary changes
|
I removed all kind of changes in the |
|
Pls. have a look on the comment #1283 (comment) to fix this |
Description
In this PR I worked on this issue link
I already added a test file where I captured all the tests that I performed test-results.txt
This change addresses suggestions from SonarCloud to adopt modern JavaScript features.
Related issue(s)