add STM warnings #4289
add STM warnings #4289
Conversation
|
@adamgfraser can you please review? Would you like me to add a deprecation for |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@robmwalsh Looks good!
I might say a little more about why this is the case so it doesn't just seem like an arbitrary gotcha. Something like. Warning: because STM describes a single atomic transaction, repeatUntil will continuously repeat the transaction until the specified condition is true without yielding back to the ZIO Runtime...
As far as forever I think it is okay to deprecate it. @mijicd What do you think?
|
If there wasn't binary compatibility constraint I'd say remove it. So yes, let's deprecate it. |
b9d4557 to
dc43a06
Compare
dc43a06 to
db5bdcb
Compare
|
@adamgfraser updated wording and deprecated forever |
|
Can this be merged now? |
| */ | ||
| @deprecated( | ||
| "Repeating until failure doesn't make sense in the context of STM because it will always roll back the transaction", | ||
| "1.0.2" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should be the version that the deprecated method will be removed, so 2.0.0.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
According to the scaladoc for @deprecated it's when it was first deprecated. If zio does things differently that's fine but this should probably be documented somewhere. I can't find any mention of this in the repo. Do you still want me to change it?
/**
*...
*@param since a string identifying the first version in which the definition was deprecated
*...
*/
class deprecated(message: String = "", since: String = "") extends scala.annotation.StaticAnnotation|
Thanks @adamgfraser :) |
doc update because ZSTM repeatWhile/repeatUntil and forever are dangerous