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

1.x: mark RxJavaPlugins.registerErrorHandler as deprecated #4569

Closed

Conversation

bobvanderlinden
Copy link
Contributor

This marks RxJavaPlugins#registerErrorHandler and RxJavaPlugins#getErrorHandler as deprecated and documents RxJavaHooks#setOnError and RxJavaHooks#getOnError as its alternatives.

Related to #4566

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Sep 20, 2016

Current coverage is 84.44% (diff: 100%)

Merging #4569 into 1.x will decrease coverage by 0.09%

@@                1.x      #4569   diff @@
==========================================
  Files           272        272          
  Lines         17571      17571          
  Methods           0          0          
  Messages          0          0          
  Branches       2683       2683          
==========================================
- Hits          14855      14838    -17   
- Misses         1864       1870     +6   
- Partials        852        863    +11   

Powered by Codecov. Last update 01e68d3...a0875ef

@akarnokd
Copy link
Member

There are legitime uses of the old hooks so I'm not certain they should be deprecated.

@bobvanderlinden
Copy link
Contributor Author

@akarnokd Ah, I gathered from #4566 and from RxJavaPlugins#getInstance and RxJavaErrorHandler#handleError being deprecated that RxJavaPlugins#registerErrorHandler would be deprecated as well.

This PR was mostly for people running into the same problem as me: using RxJavaPlugins#getInstance and implementing RxJavaErrorHandler#handleError both giving deprecation warnings while it is unclear what to use instead. The deprecation of RxJavaPlugins#getInstance does refer to RxJavaHooks, but not specifically setOnError, like what was suggested in #4566.

@bobvanderlinden
Copy link
Contributor Author

bobvanderlinden commented Sep 21, 2016

Most purposes of this PR are already solved by updating the documentation. See #4566.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants