Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Implement control mechanism for queue release #225
Implement control mechanism for queue release #225
Changes from 10 commits
4a6c1ea
1513830
d556be9
9943f2a
59244e6
0247f79
382bbd0
dbb3450
46ddd58
7471729
e561c2d
d0393a6
1f0c043
2fc12b5
eb3c380
d4e4669
7e5ddae
df12a54
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wouldn't this entail that the queue was paused before?
So the condition would be:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe we're checking that the queue was paused before this action is received, since by the time the middleware receives
CHANGE_QUEUE_SEMAPHORE
,isQueuePaused
hasn't been updated yet. So I think that!isQueuePaused
is the correct check. Does that sound right?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As you are saying, we're checking that the queue was paused before this action is received, so
isQueuePaused === true
at the moment the action arrives to the middleware. The semaphore action indicates that we shouldunblock/unpause
the queue.So for me,
didQueueResume
means that:action.type === networkActionTypes.CHANGE_QUEUE_SEMAPHORE
is about to be dispatched.isQueuePaused === true
SemaphoreColor.GREEN
, meaning we should unpause/unblock the queueThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, I see! yes good catch, I'll fix this 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can confirm fix is in d0393a6
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Alright done, do we also want to export
SEMAPHORE_COLOR
const?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You changed a different function on d0393a6 😕
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I think that's better. Once we migrate to Typescript in the future, we'll be able to leverage Enums
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Uh, my bad! Will fix it 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Tiny opt. Let's keep the state in a variable right away since we are calling
getState()
twice.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So the reason for calling getState inside the
releaseQueue
loop is that this way the queue release function always has the lateststate
on every iteration. This way, whenCHANGE_QUEUE_SEMAPHORE
andCONNECTION_CHANGE
are dispatched the new state is reflected straight away insidereleaseQueue
, since at every iteration we callgetState()
. On the other hand, if we pass downisQueuePaused
andisConnected
from middleware function their values will only reflect the state when thereleaseQueue
was created, and will not update on further state change while the queue is being released. Does that sound right?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What about this regrouping, since
isBackOnline
by itself was already a valid condition?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good idea, I'll implement this 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Have to keep
SemaphoreColor
for typing inhandleChangeQueueSemaphore
(line 88). I'll importSEMAPHORE_COLOR
as well.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
💯
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Help me understand this test, if the dequeue selector returns false, the queue is not emptied. However, I can see actions dispatched about removing stuff from the queue.
I think our best shot here is to pass the
dequeueSelector
fn tocreateReleaseQueue
as the last argument (as you are already presuming in this test, but the implementation doesn't have it).Then basically the test becomes more reasonable:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah that's the correct implementation, I'll address this 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What's the purpose of this test?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is a leftover from previous code, I'll remove it. Good catch 👍