Modularize PMA-checking functionality #3568
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
I personally think we can pass explicit parameters and resolve the edge and implicit parameters outside of the PMA module. WDYT? |
|
Good point. A Seq of TLManagerParameters is better. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Logically equivalent modularization. Useful for systems which want to implement PMA checks elsewhere in the pipeline.
Type of change: bug report | feature request | other enhancement
Impact: no functional change | API addition (no impact on existing code) | API modification
Development Phase: proposal | implementation
Release Notes