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

Make parse_stream() and scarb_command() public #1088

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

Draggu
Copy link
Contributor

@Draggu Draggu commented Jan 25, 2024

Make parse_stream() and scarb_command() public so raw command output can be captured for pretty printing

@Draggu Draggu requested review from mkaput and removed request for maciektr, tomek0123456789 and szymmis January 25, 2024 15:42
@mkaput mkaput requested review from maciektr, tomek0123456789 and szymmis and removed request for mkaput January 26, 2024 08:55
@mkaput
Copy link
Member

mkaput commented Jan 26, 2024

Leaving review to the team. My question: why do you need this? What do you mean by this?

so raw command output can be captured for pretty printing

My gut feelings are that this is not the path to achieve what you want. Don't you just want to execute scarb fetch and pipe its output instead?

@Draggu
Copy link
Contributor Author

Draggu commented Jan 26, 2024

Leaving review to the team. My question: why do you need this? What do you mean by this?

so raw command output can be captured for pretty printing

My gut feelings are that this is not the path to achieve what you want. Don't you just want to execute scarb fetch and pipe its output instead?

I need to add some additional logic to exec(). To avoid copy-pasting parsing logic, it would be awesome to reuse it from here.

@Draggu Draggu closed this Jan 26, 2024
@Draggu Draggu deleted the public-parse branch January 29, 2024 15:18
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.

2 participants