-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 66
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.
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
Corrected areas of concern. #190
Closed
+20
−16
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@coderabbitai
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Yamashou
Hello! It seems like you've tagged me but didn't provide any specific questions or requests. How can I assist you with this code review?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the mpartFilesGroupsContentType variable is redundant. Can we build the request without defining this variable?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Yamashou
We could eliminate the
multipartFilesGroupsContentType
variable by setting the "Content-Type" header directly within the conditional block where multipart files are processed. Here's how the code would look:This change would directly set the "Content-Type" header when multipart files are present, and if not, it would set the "Content-Type" to "application/json; charset=utf-8" after the request is created. This eliminates the need for the
multipartFilesGroupsContentType
variable.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That would require that the req be created before the body is created, which seems more verbose.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Yamashou
You're correct. The
http.NewRequestWithContext
call needs thebody
as an argument, so it must be created after thebody
. My previous suggestion would indeed require thereq
to be created before thebody
, which is not ideal.In that case, we can keep the
multipartFilesGroupsContentType
variable to hold the content type when multipart files are present. This way, we can create thebody
andreq
in their current order, and then set the headers afterwards. This approach maintains the current order of operations and avoids the verbosity of creating thereq
earlier.Here's how the code would look:
This change would directly set the "Content-Type" header when multipart files are present, and if not, it would set the "Content-Type" to "application/json; charset=utf-8" after the request is created. This eliminates the need for the
multipartFilesGroupsContentType
variable.