Closed
Conversation
Member
Author
|
Related #5431 |
e90dde0 to
134bc87
Compare
134bc87 to
e4fdd3f
Compare
cartant
reviewed
May 14, 2020
Collaborator
cartant
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. I like the names and the approach. This ought to make the transition easier than it would have been if multicast had been made static without being renamed, etc.
I'll have another look when this is no longer a WIP.
|
Related #3833 |
3 tasks
Member
Author
|
Closing in favor of #5634 |
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This is another go at adding proposed static multicast functions. Returning ConnectableObservable from operators is/was a mistake.
TODO:
multicastFrom(static),multicastWith(operator),publishFrom, etc)publishoperator variants that do not have a supplied selectorNOTE:
Also adds a test showing a weakness of our current approach with regards to composing custom observable types through operator chains. This could probably get added at another time, but I wanted to be sure to capture it while I was thinking of it, and seeing some of the
ConnectableObservablecode reminded me of the issue.To discuss:
xWithmakes sense, but what aboutxFrom?multicast?