- 
                Notifications
    You must be signed in to change notification settings 
- Fork 2.8k
fix spelling leveraging Oxford comma #2316
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
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|  | @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ public void write(XmlWriterRequest<Model> request) throws XmlWriterException { | |||||||||||||
| Writer writer = request.getWriter(); | ||||||||||||||
| Function<Object, String> inputLocationFormatter = request.getInputLocationFormatter(); | ||||||||||||||
| if (writer == null && outputStream == null && path == null) { | ||||||||||||||
| throw new IllegalArgumentException("writer, outputStream or path must be non null"); | ||||||||||||||
| throw new IllegalArgumentException("writer, output stream, or path must be non-null"); | ||||||||||||||
| There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. That's wrong and unrelated to this PR There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. 
        Suggested change
       
 you mean the  There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. No,  There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. yes true. Making it generic would take random impl. details away. What if tomorrow foo resources is new input? We need some valid input - thats all. 
        Suggested change
       
 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. But that's not helpful to the user. What does 'valid' means ? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yes, we could tell, as it is. 
        Suggested change
       
 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. We should focus on communicating the actual business case rather than exposing low-level implementation details, which are likely to change. At this stage, it’s more a matter of preference, since the code now clearly delineates each concern. Code and logging are 2 different worlds. | ||||||||||||||
| } | ||||||||||||||
| try { | ||||||||||||||
| MavenStaxWriter w = new MavenStaxWriter(); | ||||||||||||||
|  | ||||||||||||||


Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
this might smell, as throwing
IAEbut havingNPE.#2277 (comment)