Skip to content

TS types#27

Open
fatmalama wants to merge 2 commits intojue89:masterfrom
fatmalama:typings
Open

TS types#27
fatmalama wants to merge 2 commits intojue89:masterfrom
fatmalama:typings

Conversation

@fatmalama
Copy link

added the allowed fields as listed in https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/systemd.journal-fields.7.html minus the message and priority ones which are handled already in log.js

types/index.d.ts Outdated
Comment on lines +2 to +20
// https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/systemd.journal-fields.7.html
export type JournalFields = {
message_id?: string,
code_file?: string,
code_line?: string,
code_func?: string,
errno?: string,
invocation_id?: string,
user_invocation_id?: string,
syslog_facility?: string,
syslog_identifier?: string,
syslog_pid?: string,
syslog_timestamp?: string,
syslog_raw?: string,
documentation?: string,
tid?: string,
unit?: string,
user_unit?: string
}
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry, I'm not a TS expert. Does this definition allow for custom fields?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

no! it doesn't
we can add a [custom: string]: string, let me get around that

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

added on 40e7073, also replaced all ? with Partial

}

export default class systemd_journald {
constructor(defaultFields: JournalFields);
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

defaultFields is optional and can be omitted. Thus, change it like this?

Suggested change
constructor(defaultFields: JournalFields);
constructor(defaultFields?: JournalFields);

Just guesstimating here :D

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

my reasoning was that you wouldn't instantiate it and would use the static methods if you didn't want to provide defaults.
if you'd rather it be optional here too I'll accept the change

@jue89 jue89 mentioned this pull request Apr 5, 2024
@jue89
Copy link
Owner

jue89 commented May 24, 2024

Woahhh ... sry for not replying. I somehow missed your reaction. Currently I'm on vacation. Please ping me if nothing happened till begin of June.

@edorgeville
Copy link

@jue89 ping 🤭

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants