Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

2.x: Remove conditional resource management from async listeners. #4338

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 10, 2016
Merged

2.x: Remove conditional resource management from async listeners. #4338

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 10, 2016

Conversation

JakeWharton
Copy link
Contributor

Rename them to have a 'Resource' prefix.

Rename them to have a 'Resource' prefix.
@JakeWharton
Copy link
Contributor Author

The value of and distinction between the 'Resource' listeners, 'Default' listeners, and 'Disposable' listeners seems very low. Do we need all these individual types?

@akarnokd akarnokd added this to the 2.0 RC 1 milestone Aug 10, 2016
@akarnokd
Copy link
Member

I believe the minimum we require is the ability to dispose a Subscriber because that's expected the most. I don't think associating resources with or allowing async requesting is that common.

@codecov-io
Copy link

Current coverage is 69.17% (diff: 30.00%)

Merging #4338 into 2.x will increase coverage by 0.02%

@@                2.x      #4338   diff @@
==========================================
  Files           431        431          
  Lines         30789      30775    -14   
  Methods           0          0          
  Messages          0          0          
  Branches       4940       4934     -6   
==========================================
- Hits          21291      21290     -1   
+ Misses         7422       7403    -19   
- Partials       2076       2082     +6   

Powered by Codecov. Last update 2c3ec38...054d24a

@akarnokd akarnokd merged commit d6eaff3 into ReactiveX:2.x Aug 10, 2016
@akarnokd
Copy link
Member

I leave it to you to remove the unnecessary; we can add them back later or better yet, they can live in a separate library.

@JakeWharton
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yeah. I need to write something non-trivial with 2.x first. Maybe I'll try
this weekend. I definitely think we should be aggressive in minimizing API
surface since it's easy to add but impossible to take away after release.

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 4:23 PM David Karnok notifications@github.com
wrote:

I leave it to you to remove the unnecessary; we can add them back later or
better yet, they can live in a separate library.


You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#4338 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEEEUpTPp3Yj1XaXOI3TaKsUnuIFNUZks5qejNJgaJpZM4Jhhe4
.

@akarnokd
Copy link
Member

I have a 2.x "dumping ground" for leftovers: https://github.com/akarnokd/RxJava2Extensions so we don't lose things.

@JakeWharton JakeWharton deleted the jw/async-to-resource branch August 20, 2016 23:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants