-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 245
Add jamulusclient/setInstrumentCode JSONRPC method #3772
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
Open
dingodoppelt
wants to merge
1
commit into
jamulussoftware:main
Choose a base branch
from
dingodoppelt:client_set_instrument_rpc
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+43
−0
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
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 hidden or 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 hidden or 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
We should have one call for instrument, name, skill level, imo.
If it was REST, we'd have PUT client/profile {name: ..., instrument: ..., skill level: ..., city:... } etc.
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.
Do you mean to add
setCityandsetCountryCodeas those are still missing? Skill and name are already settable, instrument will be with this merged.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.
Yes. However I think an alternative design would be one method to set all metadata for the client
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.
For the JSONRPC, it's setter/getter mapping to the CClient entrypoints - or, here, CClientSettings (although I'd rather CClient orchestrated that...).
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.
True. We submit our changes with
pClient->SetRemoteInfo()so this is already happening (kind of).Should the name be reused as well or should it rather be
setChannelInfoanalogous togetChannelInfo?The method should still let users set single fields, i.e. only those supplied in the request, and leave the others untouched. There might be valid and invalid fields in the request which need to be checked for.
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 setChannelInfo would be good.
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.
At the moment we have one getter
getChannelInfobut multiple setters. This looks not too elegant but on the other hand I don't see see the need for more than one getter.Implementing a single setter would be trickier than having multiple setters for we have to check more input fields for validity at the same time and need to define behaviour for every possible combination of invalid and valid fields.
Any ideas on how to proceed here? @ann0see @pljones
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.
Can't we parse the json and validate it against a json schema?
This should make optional fields trivial
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.
Yes, invalid json should fail right away.
After successful parsing we check which fields are valid. (name, instrument code, shoesize, ...)
We then check each field's value for validity (type, length) and set the valid ones.
We could return the number of set fields or maybe a more verbose message?