Tal Nisan has posted comments on this change.
Change subject: core: Change CommandBase validate method to accept multiple
results
......................................................................
Patch Set 1: (4 inline comments)
How come we are losing short circuit? In the for loop we use an early return on
the first failure, exactly the same as short circuit a&&b
....................................................
File
backend/manager/modules/bll/src/main/java/org/ovirt/engine/core/bll/AddDiskCommand.java
Line 142:
Line 143: if (returnValue && vm != null) {
Line 144: storage_pool sp = getStoragePool(); // Note this is done
according to the VM's spId.
Line 145: returnValue =
Line 146: validate(new StoragePoolValidator(sp).isUp()) &&
The two calls are because the flow here do one validate, checks 2 boolean
values and then do another 3 validates, I didn't want to unify all 4 validates
in case that the order matters and the tests are dependant on one another
Line 147: isStoragePoolMatching(vm) &&
Line 148:
performImagesChecks(vm.getStoragePoolId()) &&
Line 149:
validate(getSnapshotValidator().vmNotDuringSnapshot(vm.getId()),
Line 150:
getSnapshotValidator().vmNotInPreview(vm.getId()),
Line 147: isStoragePoolMatching(vm) &&
Line 148:
performImagesChecks(vm.getStoragePoolId()) &&
Line 149:
validate(getSnapshotValidator().vmNotDuringSnapshot(vm.getId()),
Line 150:
getSnapshotValidator().vmNotInPreview(vm.getId()),
Line 151: new
VmValidator(vm).vmNotLocked());
Where do you see that? You have the first validate, if it fails we don't
continue, then the booleans and the another validate..
Line 152: }
Line 153:
Line 154: return returnValue;
Line 155: }
....................................................
File
backend/manager/modules/bll/src/main/java/org/ovirt/engine/core/bll/CommandBase.java
Line 1499: * @param validationResults
Line 1500: * The validation results from the inline call to
validate, should not be <code>null</code>.
Line 1501: * @return <code>true</code> if the validations were successful,
and <code>false</code> if one or more wasn't.
Line 1502: */
Line 1503: protected boolean validate(ValidationResult...
validationResults) {
Matter of style I guess, I rather in that case to not take the overhead of
creating a Collection
Line 1504: for (ValidationResult validationResult : validationResults) {
Line 1505: if (!validationResult.isValid()) {
Line 1506: addCanDoActionMessage(validationResult.getMessage());
Line 1507: if (validationResult.getVariableReplacements() !=
null) {
Line 1508: for (String variableReplacement :
validationResult.getVariableReplacements()) {
Line 1509: addCanDoActionMessage(variableReplacement);
Line 1510: }
Line 1511: }
Line 1512: return false;
How are we getting multiple results? We return false on the first failure thus
breaking the for loop..
Line 1513: }
Line 1514: }
Line 1515: return true;
Line 1516: }
--
To view, visit http://gerrit.ovirt.org/11557
To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.ovirt.org/settings
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: I64a18ec0e6c677192dbd86bf0b38de46e539d138
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Project: ovirt-engine
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Owner: Tal Nisan <tni...@redhat.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Alissa Bonas <abo...@redhat.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Allon Mureinik <amure...@redhat.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Ayal Baron <aba...@redhat.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Liron Aravot <lara...@redhat.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Maor Lipchuk <mlipc...@redhat.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Tal Nisan <tni...@redhat.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Yair Zaslavsky <yzasl...@redhat.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: liron aravot <liron.ara...@gmail.com>
_______________________________________________
Engine-patches mailing list
Engine-patches@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-patches
