Better name for ready?#16
Merged
Merged
Conversation
nathanmonteleone
requested review from
LiruMouse,
ctcline-simplifi and
joshuawscott
as code owners
July 23, 2025 22:18
ctcline-simplifi
approved these changes
Jul 23, 2025
| end | ||
|
|
||
| def ready?(server, timeout \\ 10_000) do | ||
| def wait_ready!(server, timeout \\ 10_000) do |
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
DynamicProcessorModule is documented with @moduledoc false indicating internal-only, so I believe I am within my rights to just change the function name entirely.
joshuawscott
approved these changes
Aug 1, 2025
LiruMouse
approved these changes
Aug 5, 2025
LiruMouse
left a comment
LiruMouse
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I swear I reviewed this already 😅
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Producer.ready? does not really behave like a predicate. Rather it blocks then returns true on success, or raises an exception on timeout. I think
wait_ready!is therefore a better name.https://simplifi.atlassian.net/browse/INT-11818