Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork9.7k
[OptionsResolver] Allow setting same normalizer to multiple option#18254
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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
[OptionsResolver] Allow setting same normalizer to multiple option#18254
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
unexge commentedMar 21, 2016
| Q | A |
|---|---|
| Branch? | master |
| Bug fix? | no |
| New feature? | no |
| BC breaks? | no |
| Deprecations? | no |
| Tests pass? | yes |
| Fixed tickets | - |
| License | MIT |
| Doc PR | - |
HeahDude commentedMar 22, 2016
backbone87 commentedMar 22, 2016
whats the problem of calling |
HeahDude commentedMar 22, 2016
@backbone87 actually |
backbone87 commentedMar 22, 2016
@HeahDude These methods have no additional arguments, so its less confusing. But the whole interface shifted more towards a "one call per option" in the recent versions, but the "array set" possibilities didnt got removed (BC). I dont think its a good idea to soften or reverse this path now. |
HeahDude commentedMar 22, 2016
@backbone87 I agree. however for handling prototypes like in#18134 it can make sense, my version to come is a new method |
unexge commentedMar 22, 2016
@backbone87 nothing wrong with calling i didn't know the whole interface shifted to "one call per option". closing this PR in favor of interface reliability. |
backbone87 commentedMar 22, 2016
at least that is my interpretation of recent changes, you dont need to close this PR and wait for feedback from some symfony members or@webmozart in this particular case |
webmozart commentedMar 30, 2016
I agree with the decision to close this ticket. I don't think this kind of syntactic sugar is needed. :) |