Simple boring
Contributor Checklist
- [x] Did you add Scaladoc to every public function/method?
- [x] Did you add at least one test demonstrating the PR?
- [x] Did you delete any extraneous printlns/debugging code?
- [x] Did you specify the type of improvement?
- [ ] Did you add appropriate documentation in
docs/src? - [x] Did you request a desired merge strategy?
- [ ] Did you add text to be included in the Release Notes for this change?
Type of Improvement
- Feature (or new API)
Desired Merge Strategy
- Squash: The PR will be squashed and merged (choose this if you have no preference).
Please backport.
Release Notes
Reviewer Checklist (only modified by reviewer)
- [ ] Did you add the appropriate labels? (Select the most appropriate one based on the "Type of Improvement")
- [ ] Did you mark the proper milestone (Bug fix:
3.5.x,3.6.x, or5.xdepending on impact, API modification or big change:6.0)? - [ ] Did you review?
- [ ] Did you check whether all relevant Contributor checkboxes have been checked?
- [ ] Did you do one of the following when ready to merge:
- [ ] Squash: You/ the contributor
Enable auto-merge (squash), clean up the commit message, and label withPlease Merge. - [ ] Merge: Ensure that contributor has cleaned up their commit history, then merge with
Create a merge commit.
- [ ] Squash: You/ the contributor
why adding this api?
Because it is simpler than using a Seq and should be the default usage. This is for my students ;-)
Why not using BoringUtils.bore(source)
Does this exist in 3.5/3.6?
Why not using
BoringUtils.bore(source)
This does only exist in 6.0, not even in 5.1 or 3.6. If this is backported to 5 and 3 then this is probably a more elegant solution.
This does only exist in 6.0, not even in 5.1 or 3.6. If this is backported to 5 and 3 then this is probably a more elegant solution.
Yes, comparing to introduce new API, I propose backporting this API to 5 and 3. But why not bumping version to 6? That's easy ;p
This does only exist in 6.0, not even in 5.1 or 3.6. If this is backported to 5 and 3 then this is probably a more elegant solution.
Yes, comparing to introduce new API, I propose backporting this API to 5 and 3. But why not bumping version to 6? That's easy ;p
No chance at the moment to use firtool with 2nd semester students. And 6.0 is not out ;-)
No chance at the moment to use firtool with 2nd semester students. And 6.0 is not out ;-)
RC is out ;p