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

BlockingObservable #272

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
May 16, 2013

Conversation

benjchristensen
Copy link
Member

Move all blocking operators to BlockingObservable. This has breaking changes for anything using blocking operators ... part of the pursuit of establishing a clean API on our path to 1.0.

This is something I've been wanting to do for a while but got the push over the ledge via discussion at #270.

This strays from "match Rx.Net as closely as possible" but feels justified for the following reasons:

  • Rx is primarily intended for asynchronous event handling and composition
  • mixing blocking and non-blocking operators is confusing and leads to poor usage patterns
  • mixing blocking operators (like take and takeLast is non-obvious)
  • Rx.Net intends on deprecating (or has already) blocking operators as per Erik Meijer @headinthebox in this discussion: Blocking behaviour in RxJava #270 (comment)

I have removed all blocking operators from Observable and put them in BlockingObservable. I have left Observable.toBlockingObservable as a means of going from one to the other as it is an obvious communication of what is now being permitted.

While doing this I also cleaned up some odd API artifacts such as toObservable vs from and moved implementation specific code from rx.util into the internal package rx.operators where all code reserves the right to change at any time.

I intend on releasing this as version 0.9.

@cloudbees-pull-request-builder

RxJava-pull-requests #144 FAILURE
Looks like there's a problem with this pull request

@cloudbees-pull-request-builder

RxJava-pull-requests #145 SUCCESS
This pull request looks good

@benjchristensen
Copy link
Member Author

Apparently another non-deterministic test testConcatUnsubscribe revealed by the always non-deterministically slow CloudBees ... second attempt succeeded, and it passes on my machine.

@benjchristensen
Copy link
Member Author

I plan on merging this tomorrow morning (Thursday, May 16th Pacific time) if no strong reasons are given for not proceeding.

@benjchristensen
Copy link
Member Author

No feedback to argue against proceeding so merging now...

benjchristensen added a commit that referenced this pull request May 16, 2013
@benjchristensen benjchristensen merged commit ce3ee1b into ReactiveX:master May 16, 2013
rickbw pushed a commit to rickbw/RxJava that referenced this pull request Jan 9, 2014
jihoonson pushed a commit to jihoonson/RxJava that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2020
…matchers

fix (ReactiveX#271): remove deprecated usage of Mockito Matchers
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.

2 participants