X Tutup
Skip to content

Small changes in Webcmdlets#19109

Merged
iSazonov merged 15 commits intoPowerShell:masterfrom
CarloToso:small-changes-webcmdlets
Feb 8, 2023
Merged

Small changes in Webcmdlets#19109
iSazonov merged 15 commits intoPowerShell:masterfrom
CarloToso:small-changes-webcmdlets

Conversation

@CarloToso
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@CarloToso CarloToso commented Feb 6, 2023

PR Summary

  • Certificate store was opened but never closed -> using store
  • I think we don't need to use GetHttpClient(handleRedirect) twice, the client doesn't change
  • Formatting

PR Context

PR Checklist

currentUri = new Uri(request.RequestUri, response.Headers.Location);

// Continue to handle redirection
using (client = GetHttpClient(handleRedirect))
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good step for #12764 (comment) You could continue...

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I will try to continue, can you give me a more detailed to-do list?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I laid out there already. The goal is to cache HttpClient/HttpClientHandler in WebSession. These HttpClient/HttpClientHandler cannot be changed after they start. So if a cmdlet is called with modified arguments when there is a WebSession, we have to recreate them. This makes me think that our first step is to move all initialization to BeginProcessing. If it's possible, we can then implement caching.

@iSazonov iSazonov added the CL-CodeCleanup Indicates that a PR should be marked as a Code Cleanup change in the Change Log label Feb 6, 2023
response = GetResponse(client, redirectRequest, handleRedirect);
}
using HttpRequestMessage redirectRequest = GetRequest(currentUri);
response = GetResponse(client, redirectRequest, handleRedirect);
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nit: it would great to inspect how we dispose HttpResponseMessage

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@CarloToso CarloToso Feb 7, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I noticed that:

  • response = GetResponse(client, redirectRequest, handleRedirect); line 1275
  • return GetResponse(client, requestWithoutRange, handleRedirect); line 1309
    are doing the same thing, I think they should have similar formatting, which one is better?

To dispose of HttpResponseMessage we could add using on line 1422, and it might be enough

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@iSazonov iSazonov Feb 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't understand the question about formatting.

To dispose of HttpResponseMessage we could add using on line 1422

Yes. And I see two callsites return GetResponse - I guess we need to dispose previous response before return new one.

In follow PR please.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm sorry, I meant they should have the same syntax (not formatting) . And I wanted to know which syntax was more clear. In the next PR

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@iSazonov iSazonov Feb 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I still don't understand. Feel free to pull PR with your preference.

@iSazonov iSazonov closed this Feb 8, 2023
@iSazonov iSazonov reopened this Feb 8, 2023
@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated
Copy link
Copy Markdown

This PR has 21 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +8 -13
Percentile : 8.4%

Total files changed: 1

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +8 -13

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@iSazonov iSazonov changed the title Small changes webcmdlets Small changes in Webcmdlets Feb 8, 2023
@iSazonov iSazonov merged commit 462f825 into PowerShell:master Feb 8, 2023
@ghost
Copy link
Copy Markdown

ghost commented Mar 14, 2023

🎉v7.4.0-preview.2 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

CL-CodeCleanup Indicates that a PR should be marked as a Code Cleanup change in the Change Log Extra Small

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

X Tutup