Implement the 'Start' operator #594
Conversation
|
RxJava-pull-requests #528 SUCCESS |
|
Nice! So |
|
Thanks, @samuelgruetter , I added more tests. Is it necessary to construct a special test that |
|
RxJava-pull-requests #533 SUCCESS |
| * or an exception. | ||
| * @see <a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh229265(v=vs.103).aspx">MSDN: Observable.Start</a> | ||
| */ | ||
| public static Observable<Void> start(Action0 action) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since we have the Func0 version, do we need this Action0 overload? The issue is that dynamic languages can't differentiate between the two.
If someone truly has a Void returning action (which to me should be a rarity) then they can put Func0<Void>.
I'd recommend we remove the Action0 overloads and only have Func0.
|
RxJava-pull-requests #537 SUCCESS |
Implement the 'Start' operator
Implement the 'Start' operator
…er are ca… (ReactiveX#594) * Issue ReactiveX#581: Some RxJava2 or Reactor operators like ZipObserver are cancelling (disposing) a second Observable when the first observable is complete. This is because an operator like zip must combine two events. It makes no sense to consume further events of the second observable when the first is completed. Unfortunately the cancellation is bad for the CircuitBreakerOperator, since no success is recorded even if an emit was emitted successfully. Solution: The CircuitBreaker operator and BulkHead operator could track if an event has been emitted successfully (onNext). And when dispose/cancel is invoked, the operator either invokes onSuccess/onComplete or releasePermission.
Hi, this PR implemented the
Startoperator #81. Please take a look.