Use `Fallback` instead of `Func`

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #1615 (08c55a7) into master (6b71044) will increase coverage by 0.01%. The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #1615      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     90.07%   90.09%   +0.01%     
+ Complexity     1602     1601       -1     
============================================
  Files           298      298              
  Lines          3748     3745       -3     
  Branches        122      122              
============================================
- Hits           3376     3374       -2     
+ Misses          338      337       -1     
  Partials         34       34              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/main/java/org/cactoos/Fallback.java	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...rc/main/java/org/cactoos/bytes/UncheckedBytes.java	100.00% <100.00%> (+8.33%)	: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 6b71044...08c55a7. Read the comment docs.

[victornoel]

@0crat status

[victornoel]

@0crat status

[0crat]

@0crat status (here)

@victornoel This is what I know about this job in C63314D6Z, as in §32:

• The job #1615 is not in scope
• Job footprint (restricted area)

[0crat]

@0crat status (here)

@victornoel This is what I know about this job in C63314D6Z, as in §32:

• The job #1615 is not in scope
• Job footprint (restricted area)

[victornoel]

@andreoss I was surprised when I saw that UncheckedBytes, contrary to many of the other UncheckedXXX classes this fallback paramter... I'm not convinced there is a real use for this. I would instead propose to remove this parameter at all, here and in the other UncheckedXXX classes. Along with this, we can think about introducing and unifying how all the XXXWithFallback work.

WDYT? If you like the idea and create a ticket for it, I will put it in scope

[victornoel]

@andreoss one of the tests if failing apparently

[andreoss]

@victornoel A flaky test, apparently.

[victornoel]

@andreoss yep… let's just ignore it ^^

[victornoel]

@rultor merge

[rultor]

@rultor merge

@victornoel OK, I'll try to merge now. You can check the progress of the merge here

[rultor]

@rultor merge

@victornoel Done! FYI, the full log is here (took me 11min)

[0crat]

Job gh:yegor256/cactoos#1615 is not assigned, can't get performer

[0pdd]

@andreoss the puzzle #1623 is still not solved.

[victornoel]

@0crat status

[0pdd]

@andreoss the puzzle [#unknown]() is still not solved.

[0crat]

@0crat status (here)

@victornoel This is what I know about this job in C63314D6Z, as in §32:

• The job #1615 is not in scope
• Job footprint (restricted area)