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

Consider re-exporting package:fake_async and package:clock and removing custom impls #590

Open
jakemac53 opened this issue Apr 6, 2020 · 4 comments
Labels

Comments

@jakemac53
Copy link
Contributor

We currently maintain duplicate implementations of FakeAsync and Clock in the fake_async and clock packages. I haven't done a full evaluation but they seem almost identical.

Can we simply re-export those packages from here instead to keep them in sync?

We could at the same time deprecate the public entrypoints for those libraries and point at those packages.

@cbracken
Copy link
Member

cbracken commented Apr 6, 2020

Good question -- FakeAsync was originally created here but later broken out into its own package. At one point there definitely were are a few differences but if we haven't yet, we should kill those off. It seems reasonable to either re-export them or simply deprecate the quiver version and redirect users to FakeAsync in the documentation. Will take a look.

@jakemac53
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note that I have a PR out to fake_async to add the pendingTimersDebugInfo stuff, dart-lang/fake_async#17

@jakemac53
Copy link
Contributor Author

I realized that this is actually likely a blocker for migrating flutter_test off of quiver - there is at least one test internally which grabs the clock from flutter_test and passes it to something that expects a quiver Clock.

If we just re-export package:clock that solves the problem though.

@jakemac53
Copy link
Contributor Author

You can pretty easily make a quiver clock from a package:clock clock (quiver.Clock(clock.now)) basically. So not actually a blocker.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants