-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 58
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
Split rakefile into parts #25
Conversation
5295e26
to
051ec87
Compare
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.
Same global remarks as in SwiftGen/SwiftGen#269 (review) especially about:
- calling
$?.success?
as close as possible as the shell command for which we want to test the exit code - finding better names for
xcrun
vsxcpretty
vsplain
functions (especially that last one), or even make it one single function (e.g.run_cmd
) with appropriate parameters
e5b69aa
to
4911510
Compare
3764cd2
to
db61e5e
Compare
class Utils | ||
|
||
# run a command using xcrun and xcpretty if applicable | ||
def self.run(cmd, task, subtask = '', xcrun: false, xcpretty: false, direct: false) |
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.
xcpretty
and direct
are mutually exclusive (i.e. the API technically allows you to call xcpretty: true, direct: true
while it wouldn't make sense).
In a future version, maybe use a symbol instead, like formatter: :xcpretty
vc formatter: :none
vs formatter: :direct
? (Although the difference between direct and none wouldn't be obvious so we'd need to find better names)
I'll let that small refactoring for the future PR in Eve consolidating rakelib accross repos though, so we can merge this now.
We should check how we can repeat these across repositories and keep them in sync. Right now there are some small differences due to layout differences and different requirements.