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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

use explicit map calls #11

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Aug 26, 2014
Merged

use explicit map calls #11

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
10 changes: 5 additions & 5 deletions effectivescala.mo
View file
Open in desktop
Expand Up @@ -1596,10 +1596,10 @@ Using Offer/Brokers, we can express this quite naturally:
private[this] def loop(connq: Queue[Conn]) {
Offer.choose(
if (connq.isEmpty) Offer.never else {
val (head, rest) = connq.dequeue
waiters.send(head) { _ => loop(rest) }
val (head, rest) = connq.dequeue()
waiters.send(head) map { _ => loop(rest) }
},
returnConn.recv { c => loop(connq enqueue c) }
returnConn.recv map { c => loop(connq.enqueue(c)) }
).sync()
}

Expand All @@ -1612,8 +1612,8 @@ reasoning further. The interface to the pool is also through an Offer, so if a c
wishes to apply a timeout, they can do so through the use of combinators:

val conn: Future[Option[Conn]] = Offer.choose(
pool.get { conn => Some(conn) },
Offer.timeout(1.second) { _ => None }
pool.get map { conn => Some(conn) },
Offer.timeout(1.second) map { _ => None }
).sync()

No extra bookkeeping was required to implement timeouts; this is due to
Expand Down