feat: created new multiparser #52
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
|
well done Jeferson @shinspiegel , it looks so great, can you please add a simple testing? |
ije
approved these changes
Nov 28, 2020
|
thanks |
|
Sure thing! Ps.: The test passed on the automated tooling, cool stuff! |
|
so good! |
ije
approved these changes
Nov 30, 2020
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Hi!
After we talk on the #35, I did created a new parser for this project. I did use as a base structure the parser from deligenius/multiparser.
Besides that I did change the try/catch block, know any error should be resolved in the request function instead of the API call, that's what you thought in the #35, right?
Any suggestions to improve this parser?