-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 926
add method to retrieve instrumentation configuration by name #7927
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
zeitlinger
wants to merge
7
commits into
open-telemetry:main
Choose a base branch
from
zeitlinger:get-java-node
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
3d18a77
feat: add method to retrieve instrumentation configuration by name
zeitlinger 704499d
add test
zeitlinger 85beb5c
pr review
zeitlinger 5b60d37
feat: add method to retrieve general instrumentation configuration by…
zeitlinger 051899e
feat: add method to retrieve general instrumentation configuration by…
zeitlinger 2283eb6
pr review
zeitlinger 576f287
pr review
zeitlinger File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
would we be comfortable with something shorter, e.g.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What about "getGeneralInstrumentation"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like this for general, but symmetric naming yields
getJavaInstrumentation(name), which makes it sound like its accessing the instrumentation rather than the config for the instrumentation.Not that
getInstrumentationJava(name)is especially obvious either, but at least the method name reflects the path to the YAML node being accessed.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
maybe
with the idea that the "Java" is redundant for the Java SDK
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is getInstrumentation(name) too close to getInstrumentationConfig() given the difference in function?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
is there a way we could remove getInstrumentationConfig()?
what if we added something like
.exists()toDeclarativeConfigurationPropertiesfor the few people who may care about the difference between intermediate nodes being present or notThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not particularly attached to it, but there's the bit about it being part of the spec. Of course the spec can be changed. But the path of least resistance for the short term is to find method names that jive with the current spec and which can be characterized as syntactic sugar. The spec doesn't prohibit syntactic sugar so it's the sweet spot where we can improve usability quickly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not particularly attached to it, but there's the bit about it being part of the spec. Of course the spec can be changed. But the path of least resistance for the short term is to find method names that jive with the current spec and which can be characterized as syntactic sugar. The spec doesn't prohibit syntactic sugar so it's the sweet spot where we can improve usability quickly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not particularly attached to it, but there's the bit about it being part of the spec. Of course the spec can be changed. But the path of least resistance for the short term is to find method names that jive with the current spec and which can be characterized as syntactic sugar. The spec doesn't prohibit syntactic sugar so it's the sweet spot where we can improve usability quickly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I went for
getInstrumentationConfiggetGeneralInstrumentationConfignow based on the feedback. Let me know what you think.