-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
Add IDL of Objects features #345
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
Since both
LiveMapandLiveCounterextend this class and are part ofRealtimeObjects, it makes sense to name the classBaseRealtimeObject.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.
Additionally, we agreed to avoid using
LiveObject/LiveObjectsin the code.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.
we agreed to not use term "LiveObjects" (plural) in the code specifically when talking about the feature "Objects".
"LiveObject" (singular) is a name for any "live object" - "live map", "live counter", "live list" (in the future)
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.
It is way easier to call something a "live object" (as we do in our conversations) and refer to it as "LiveObject" in the spec.
Since it also looks like that it shouldn't be necessary to expose
LiveObjecttype to the public (kotlin and - and swift too I believe - implementations don't expose it) I'd prefer we stick to a simple name in the specUh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Then better if we call it
BaseLiveObjectorBaseObjectsince it's extended byLiveMap,LiveCounterand not exposed externally. wdytThere 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.
But... why? I don't see a clear reason to change it. If it's not a public type then the name itself is not that important, and
LiveObjecttype name accomplishes what we need it to do in the spec. And if it is exposed publicly (which it currently is in ably-js) we can't just change the name in the spec as we would also need to update ably-js implementation.I really don't want to go through all spec PRs and update the
LiveObjectname to something else given it does what it need to right nowThere 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.
Okay, since it's an internal type, we can ignore the naming convention.