[uss_qualifier] Check for presence of includes_advisories before accessing field
#439
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
barroco
approved these changes
Dec 21, 2023
github-actions bot
added a commit
to BradNicolle/monitoring
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 21, 2023
…cessing field (interuss#439) Check for presence of `includes_advisories` before accessing field 51ef122
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fixes #438.
One question is whether to specify None, specify Unknown, or omit the argument when constructing the result when the client's response did not include a value. I believe all three options are essentially interchangeable for the purpose of processing the result, so I chose the option that made the resulting value more concrete.