[PATCH 3 of 8] ignore: add ui to ignore stack

[Pierre-Yves David]

On 05/13/2015 06:34 PM, Durham Goode wrote:
>
>
> On 5/13/15, 6:20 PM, "Pierre-Yves David" <pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 05/13/2015 08:13 AM, Durham Goode wrote:
>>> # HG changeset patch
>>> # User Durham Goode <durham at fb.com>
>>> # Date 1431468882 25200
>>> #      Tue May 12 15:14:42 2015 -0700
>>> # Node ID 5af3cb8572c462a3f21c45f7f8d9fdb0289dd373
>>> # Parent  1236d101b01d251715016df1b0ba53d3a37edfb8
>>> ignore: add ui to ignore stack
>>>
>>> In a future patch we will need access to the ui.config inside the
>>> ignore logic.
>>> This patch adds it to the functions.  A future patch will also remove
>>> the
>>> redundant 'warn' variable here.
>>
>> Do you have to pass the whole ui object there. Can't we just use the one
>> boolean of interested in there? I'm getting concerns at the `ui` object
>> getting its own cult, leaking everywhere, having small and simple piece
>> of code depending on it.
>
> I figured the fact that it needs to call warn() means the ui probably
> should've been passed in to begin with (since passing the warn function is
> funky).  In this case, since it needs both ui.warn and ui.config, it seems
> like passing the ui makes sense.
>
> If people disagree, I can change it.  I just think passing the ui is
> cleaner and the down sides are minimal.

The warn function is a fairly agnostic way to "express error message if 
any", we use this pattern in some other part of the code.

Passing the ui object is definitely not a crazy approach. But I would 
like to avoid the automatism of having ui object everywhere. I'll not 
fight too much about that if the rest of the project disagree.


-- 
Pierre-Yves David