Closed nmeum closed 5 years ago
Merging #22 into master will increase coverage by
0.03%
. The diff coverage is0%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #22 +/- ##
=========================================
+ Coverage 56.07% 56.1% +0.03%
=========================================
Files 13 13
Lines 2331 2333 +2
=========================================
+ Hits 1307 1309 +2
- Misses 917 918 +1
+ Partials 107 106 -1
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
commands.go | 0% <0%> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
conn.go | 59.83% <0%> (+0.81%) |
:arrow_up: |
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 618b325...402df2d. Read the comment docs.
As for other methods, will have to give it a bit more thought.
I guess we could just merge it as is and improve the API later on?
This commit adds support for the IRCv3.2 MONITOR command [1]. This includes a new function for sending MONITOR commands to the IRC server and constants for creating handlers for the server responses.
Discussion: Currently no fancy abstraction is offered for the MONITOR command. Meaning the caller can:
modifier ∉ {+, -, C, L, S}
.Both 1. and 2. could be addressed by implementing separate functions for the different MONITOR command modifiers (e.g.
MonitorAdd()
,MonitorDel()
, …) and performing more sanity checks in those functions. If 2. is not considered an issue and should be resolved by the caller 1. could alternatively by defining a new type for the modifier.An entirely different solution would be adding methods for monitoring to the
User struct
. For example:User.Monitor(), User.Unmonitor(), …
.