fix: platform #4680
fix: platform #4680
Conversation
| const category = this.$route.query.category | ||
| const type = this.$route.query.type | ||
| const category = this.$route.query._category | ||
| const type = this.$route.query._type | ||
| const url = `/api/v1/assets/categories/constraints/?category=${category}&type=${type}` | ||
| const constraints = await this.$axios.get(url) | ||
| this.defaultOptions = constraints |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The difference between this.$route.query.category and _category is that the first one refers to route query variables while the second one does not.
However, there aren't any known bugs in this specific code snippet provided. It seems perfectly valid JavaScript code.
If we consider adding more complexity by introducing asynchronous methods or changing how dependencies work, it may become a bit challenging or unnecessary as per the current requirements of the question; but without further context regarding what you'd like added/modified about this snippet, I'll keep it simple for brevity:
-
The existing structure is well-formed with no apparent issues or inefficiencies noted.
-
As an optimization suggestion, since
get(url)will always get responses from the server regardless of whether a constraint exists, perhaps add a condition where if there's data on the server already (constraints != null) return its response instead of making another API call to fetch again? This can save computation time when fetching assets which don't require these extra constraints.
In summary:
- No immediate errors were detected.
- Slight change needed (to handle constraints data differently).
As requested, here are my English explanations:
-
Functionality: Both functions perform similar tasks within their respective namespaces: they make a GET request according to the route parameters (_query) or path variables. They use async function syntax and promise chaining for handling asynchronous operations asynchronously rather than blocking user interfaces.
-
Improvements suggested:
1. **Optimization/Suggestion**: In certain scenarios (not specified), could possibly optimize by returning `constraints.response` instead of repeatedly sending the request.- However, the initial analysis suggests everything works fine as intended considering the limited information given. If additional complexities need to be handled, the scope could grow beyond just this snippet.
|
fix: platform