Refactor abort_if() calls to Gate::denyIf() when a user is concerned
#400
+272
−1
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Collaborator
|
I feel like this rule could remove some checks that are supposed to prevent all types of users, and there's no way to handle all cases correctly. For example, |
Collaborator
|
@imliam I like the rule in theory but as @GeniJaho pointed out, it's a bit problematic and I can't think of any way to reduce that. I think this could become one of those rules that just adds to maintenance work later on without providing a ton of value to end users. We appreciate the effort though. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Per this thread, the reasons for preferring Gates here are:
abort_if()throws a plain HttpException, whileGate::denyIfthrows a more precise AuthorizationException which can be used by the exception handlerThis is a quite opinionated one so I wouldn't include it as part of any default sets, but still think it's an interesting and useful refactor.