Skip to content
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

Added Utility method for topological sort #117

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

Added Utility method for topological sort #117

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

michielmulders
Copy link
Contributor

Provide utility method for topology sorting #113

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Nov 2, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #117 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #117   +/-   ##
======================================
  Coverage    82.2%   82.2%           
======================================
  Files          21      21           
  Lines         281     281           
======================================
  Hits          231     231           
  Misses         50      50

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 5f2ee8c...c6cb3e8. Read the comment docs.

@michielmulders
Copy link
Contributor Author

Had to rewrite code a bit to fit eslint style.
I changed if (!!input.fulfills) { ... } to if (input.fulfills) { ... }

According to this rule: https://eslint.org/docs/rules/no-extra-boolean-cast ::

In contexts such as an if statement’s test where the result of the expression will already be coerced to a Boolean, casting to a Boolean via double negation (!!) or a Boolean call is unnecessary

Copy link
Contributor

@TimDaub TimDaub left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please add docs for this.

@michielmulders
Copy link
Contributor Author

Moved to: #143

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants