[Koha-bugs] [Bug 24254] Add Koha::Items->filter_by_visible_in_opac

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.koha-community.org]

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=24254

Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart at bugs.koha-community.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|Passed QA                   |In Discussion
           Keywords|release-notes-needed        |

--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart at bugs.koha-community.org> ---
(In reply to Tomás Cohen Arazi from comment #18)
> (In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #17)
> > (In reply to Tomás Cohen Arazi from comment #15)
> > > (In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #13)
> > > > Why does the method take rules in parameter? Why don't we simply build the
> > > > rules from the pref in the method?
> > > 
> > > If it was called in a loop, we could reuse the rules. That was the idea.
> > > Maybe we should read the rules locally if the parameter was not passed at
> > > all (i.e. !exists $params->{rules}).
> > 
> > What for? Performance?
> > If we are looping on biblios then it's not that reading the pref and
> > building the rules that will have an impact on perf. If you are concerned
> > about that I would cache it at package level (->{_item_hide_rules}).
> > 
> > I think it's better to prevent calls that will forget to pass the rules, or
> > having to update all the callers if we decide to add one rules.
> > 
> > What do you think?
> 
> I usually prefer explicit vs. implicit. But not a strong position on this
> particular case. The 'if passed use it, if not, read it' approach seems to
> me like the best compromise option. This could be a follow-up bug (it
> requires new tests, probably adapt the callers)

I don't think it's explicit vs implicit.
->filter_by_visible_in_opac is explicit already.
If you are passing a set of rules then it would be ->filter_by_rules
As I said I am also concerned about the need to update the callers if rules are
added.
If we agree on that it should be done on this bug report, not a follow-up bug.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.