Github user ashutakGG commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-griffin/pull/434#discussion_r224431040
--- Diff:
measure/src/main/scala/org/apache/griffin/measure/configuration/dqdefinition/DQConfig.scala
---
@@ -74,9 +74,9 @@ case class DQConfig(@JsonProperty("name") private val
name: String,
*/
@JsonInclude(Include.NON_NULL)
case class DataSourceParam( @JsonProperty("name") private val name: String,
- @JsonProperty("baseline") private val
baseline: Boolean,
--- End diff --
No, it's not. But keeping fields with default values as last elements in
case classes is kind of "best practice" in scala. For example, scala
compilation fails for the following snippet of code
```
case class Foo(a: Int, b: Int = 22, c: Double)
val foo = Foo(1, 3.3)
```
For this particular class we can avoid reordering. But I see more reasons
to do it right and don't see any reasons to keep it as is (except we are scared
to change any pice of code).
---
