refactor generated command & subcommand boilerplate #14

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Open

jxsl13 wants to merge 1 commit into spf13:main from jxsl13:boilerplate-constructors

jxsl13 commented Mar 1, 2022 •

edited

Loading

This is not my final image of how the commands should be constructed but my final image would require to work with the Go AST library which I am not familiar with and imo might be overkill.
I usually do call rootCmd.AddCommand(NewSubCommand()) inside of the constructor NewRootCmd() which would be quite hard to do with generated code. cobra-cli would need to actually parse generated Go code and append lines at specific locations for that to work with sub commands that are added afterwards.

That's way too much work so I did go a slightly easier way.
Might not be the final stage but definitely a step forward.


          refactor generated command & subcommand boilerplate

6a65f94

jxsl13 mentioned this pull request

[RFC] improve generated boilerplate #12

Open

Author

jxsl13 commented Mar 14, 2022

@johnSchnake please review

jpmcb reviewed

View reviewed changes

Collaborator

jpmcb left a comment

Hi there - thanks for providing this.

Overall, looks good but I'm wondering if we want to do some work to define the recommended approach in our docs and examples before we go forward with merging this.

I like the idea of removing the init chunks

John S. has good eyes on this too, so would also like his input.

I think @marckhouzam can give some recommendation here too as to what Helm does.

github-actions bot commented May 14, 2022

This PR is being marked as stale due to a long period of inactivity

github-actions bot added the kind/stale label

marckhouzam removed the kind/stale label

Collaborator

marckhouzam commented May 14, 2022

Still haven't gotten around to this one. Sorry.

Collaborator

jpmcb commented May 14, 2022

No worries!!!! We can mark this for post v1.5.0 if that makes sense?

github-actions bot commented Jul 14, 2022

This PR is being marked as stale due to a long period of inactivity

github-actions bot added the kind/stale label

Author

jxsl13 commented Jul 14, 2022

blub

github-actions bot removed the kind/stale label

github-actions bot commented Sep 27, 2022

This PR is being marked as stale due to a long period of inactivity

github-actions bot added kind/stale and removed kind/stale labels

github-actions bot commented Nov 28, 2022

This PR is being marked as stale due to a long period of inactivity

github-actions bot added kind/stale and removed kind/stale labels

github-actions bot commented Jan 29, 2023

This PR is being marked as stale due to a long period of inactivity

github-actions bot added kind/stale and removed kind/stale labels

github-actions bot commented Mar 31, 2023

This PR is being marked as stale due to a long period of inactivity

github-actions bot added kind/stale and removed kind/stale labels

github-actions bot commented Jun 1, 2023

This PR is being marked as stale due to a long period of inactivity

github-actions bot added kind/stale and removed kind/stale labels

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

Labels

None yet