From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <m.heiserer@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70F3095D33
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:17:11 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5365E6ABF
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:16:41 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
[94.136.29.106])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:16:40 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7AB2B4555F
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:16:40 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <a1b5707e-8260-d23e-38b2-5cc4c752aac1@proxmox.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:16:39 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.6.0
To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
References: <20230117121723.65246-1-m.heiserer@proxmox.com>
<20230117121723.65246-2-m.heiserer@proxmox.com>
<6b624905-ef72-1ddd-b940-f34d16523f3f@proxmox.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Matthias Heiserer <m.heiserer@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <6b624905-ef72-1ddd-b940-f34d16523f3f@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL -0.114 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
NICE_REPLY_A -0.094 Looks like a legit reply (A)
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
information. [me.drive]
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager 2/2] GUI: efi disk: cleanup - var to
const
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 11:17:11 -0000
On 18.01.2023 15:03, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> Am 17/01/2023 um 13:17 schrieb Matthias Heiserer:
>> Signed-off-by: Matthias Heiserer <m.heiserer@proxmox.com>
>> ---
>> www/manager6/qemu/HDEfi.js | 12 ++++++------
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/www/manager6/qemu/HDEfi.js b/www/manager6/qemu/HDEfi.js
>> index ef3092a6..f6b7fc26 100644
>> --- a/www/manager6/qemu/HDEfi.js
>> +++ b/www/manager6/qemu/HDEfi.js
>> @@ -9,13 +9,13 @@ Ext.define('PVE.qemu.EFIDiskInputPanel', {
>> vmconfig: {}, // used to select usused disks
>>
>> onGetValues: function(values) {
>> - var me = this;
>> + const me = this;
>>
>> if (me.disabled) {
>> return {};
>> }
>>
>> - var confid = 'efidisk0';
>> + const confid = 'efidisk0';
>>
>> if (values.hdimage) {
>> me.drive.file = values.hdimage;
>> @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ Ext.define('PVE.qemu.EFIDiskInputPanel', {
>> },
>>
>> setNodename: function(nodename) {
>> - var me = this;
>> + const me = this;
>> me.down('#hdstorage').setNodename(nodename);
>> me.down('#hdimage').setStorage(undefined, nodename);
>> },
>> @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ Ext.define('PVE.qemu.EFIDiskInputPanel', {
>> },
>>
>> initComponent: function() {
>> - var me = this;
>> + const me = this;
>>
>> me.drive = {};
>>
>> @@ -96,9 +96,9 @@ Ext.define('PVE.qemu.EFIDiskEdit', {
>>
>> width: 450,
>> initComponent: function() {
>> - var me = this;
>> + const me = this;
>>
>> - var nodename = me.pveSelNode.data.node;
>> + const nodename = me.pveSelNode.data.node;
>> if (!nodename) {
>> throw "no node name specified";
>> }
>
> I'm not that huge fan of applying JavaScript's const broadly to non-scalar values,
> as it's only a shallow constant and immutable; so no effect on array/object member.
I quite like const, especially with `const me = this`, because it tells
me that I don't have to worry about the variable being reassigned.
But as long as there's a guideline on whether to use it, I'm happy :)
>
> I mean we can start to use it more for scalar variables, as eslint catches overriding
> the const variable itself directly - but it probably makes sense to add some basic
> rules w.r.t. when/how it should be used over `let` in our JS style guide, something
> along the line of:
>
> "Using `let` is fine in most context, and while `const` can have some advantages and
> possibly even avoid some specific bugs, it should only be applied to scalar values but
> not objects or arrays."
>
> What do you think (apart from grammar/typos ;-))?
Looks good