Wiser coders than myself have come to the conclusion that a `switch`
statement is almost always superior to a statement that includes any
`else if`.
The exceptions that I have found in our codebase are just these two:
* The `if else` is followed by an additional statement before the next
condition (separated by a `;`).
* The whole thing is within a `for` loop and `break` statements are
used. In this case, using `switch` would require tagging the `for`
loop, which probably tips the balance.
Why are `switch` statements more readable?
For one, fewer curly braces. But more importantly, the conditions all
have the same alignment, so the whole thing follows the natural flow
of going down a list of conditions. With `else if`, in contrast, all
conditions but the first are "hidden" behind `} else if `, harder to
spot and (for no good reason) presented differently from the first
condition.
I'm sure the aforemention wise coders can list even more reasons.
In any case, I like it so much that I have found myself recommending
it in code reviews. I would like to make it a habit in our code base,
without making it a hard requirement that we would test on the CI. But
for that, there has to be a role model, so this commit eliminates all
`if else` occurrences, unless it is autogenerated code or fits one of
the exceptions above.
Signed-off-by: beorn7 <beorn@grafana.com>
We haven't updated golint-ci in our CI yet, but this commit prepares
for that.
There are a lot of new warnings, and it is mostly because the "revive"
linter got updated. I agree with most of the new warnings, mostly
around not naming unused function parameters (although it is justified
in some cases for documentation purposes – while things like mocks are
a good example where not naming the parameter is clearer).
I'm pretty upset about the "empty block" warning to include `for`
loops. It's such a common pattern to do something in the head of the
`for` loop and then have an empty block. There is still an open issue
about this: https://github.com/mgechev/revive/issues/810 I have
disabled "revive" altogether in files where empty blocks are used
excessively, and I have made the effort to add individual
`// nolint:revive` where empty blocks are used just once or twice.
It's borderline noisy, though, but let's go with it for now.
I should mention that none of the "empty block" warnings for `for`
loop bodies were legitimate.
Signed-off-by: beorn7 <beorn@grafana.com>
i) Uses the more idiomatic Wrap and Wrapf methods for creating nested errors.
ii) Fixes some incorrect usages of fmt.Errorf where the error messages don't have any formatting directives.
iii) Does away with the use of fmt package for errors in favour of pkg/errors
Signed-off-by: tariqibrahim <tariq181290@gmail.com>
* *: use latest release of staticcheck
It also fixes a couple of things in the code flagged by the additional
checks.
Signed-off-by: Simon Pasquier <spasquie@redhat.com>
* Use official release of staticcheck
Also run 'go list' before staticcheck to avoid failures when downloading packages.
Signed-off-by: Simon Pasquier <spasquie@redhat.com>
Rational:
* When the config is reloaded and the provider context is canceled, we need to
exit the current ZK `TargetProvider.Run` method as a new provider will be
instantiated.
* In case `Stop` is called on the `ZookeeperTreeCache`, the update/events
channel may not be closed as it is shared by multiple caches and would
thus be double closed.
* Stopping all `zookeeperTreeCacheNode`s on teardown ensures all associated
watcher go-routines will be closed eagerly rather than implicityly on
connection close events.
Prometheus is Apache 2 licensed, and most source files have the
appropriate copyright license header, but some were missing it without
apparent reason. Correct that by adding it.
nerve's registration format differs from serverset. With this commit
there is now a dedicated treecache file in util,
and two separate files for serverset and nerve.
Reference:
https://github.com/airbnb/nerve
