Skip to content

Conversation

@mbrandonw
Copy link
Member

This was brought up a long time ago by @mayoff in the Swift forums, but at the time we didn't think it was necessary since scheduler animations seemed to cover all its use cases. However, with some of the concurrency updates we will be bringing to the library soon this kind of operator is going to be handy when used with Effect.task.

@mbrandonw mbrandonw requested a review from stephencelis June 6, 2022 22:52
Comment on lines +179 to +180
/// When read from a trailing closure assertion in ``send(_:_:file:line:)`` or
/// ``receive(_:_:file:line:)``, it will equal the `inout` state passed to the closure.
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

unrelated docc warning fixes.

import Combine
import SwiftUI

extension Publisher {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Given long-term thoughts on the Effect type, should we define this directly on Effect instead, or should we pull it out as a Combine helper and define it in CombineSchedulers, instead (though it admittedly isn't a scheduler-specific operation)?

Copy link
Member

@stephencelis stephencelis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could merge as is, but if you agree it should be defined on Effect, could take that change.

@mbrandonw mbrandonw merged commit 192dadd into main Jun 7, 2022
@mbrandonw mbrandonw deleted the effect-animation branch June 7, 2022 15:03
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