Bene added a comment. In https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T112893#1657772, @JeroenDeDauw wrote:
> Thanks for looking at this. Those findings are not surprising - such > construction ought to occur primarily in the data access layer and > deserialization code. Indeed, our code seems to handle the construction of value objects in a very nice way. > Any reason you did not include `EntityId` and derivatives? Those aren't important for the current RFC that is adressed by this investigation because we already have an abstract base interface with `EntityId`. > Why did you exclude the tests? If I'm not mistaken the reason for having this > investigation task is to get an idea of the cost of making breaking changes. > That cost applies just as well to test code as to production code. Yes, but fixing the tests should be very easy in most cases by replacing the constructor calls to some random implementation. However, it would be nice if all the tests would cover all implementations of the data model that we are going to implement. Just for record: There are of course a lot of constructor calls in the tests. > What do you mean with "our codebase"? Which code did you include in this > analysis? Is it everything that needs to be maintained by the Wikidata team, > or just Client, Lib and Repository? For now, I only looked into the Wikibase.git repository and its dependencies but we also need to check our other extensions. We should add the usages from there to the list. TASK DETAIL https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T112893 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: Bene Cc: daniel, Lydia_Pintscher, Aklapper, JanZerebecki, aude, Bene, JeroenDeDauw, thiemowmde, Jonas, Wikidata-bugs _______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
