data: Schedule #733
data: Schedule #733
Conversation
| * @return | ||
| * A computation that produces the result of this computation with Async and Abort[Throwable] effects | ||
| */ | ||
| def retry(backoff: Int => Duration, n: Int)(using Flat[A], Frame): A < (S & Async & Abort[Throwable]) = |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've removed the "raw" method to reduce API surface
| /** The default retry policy with no backoff and 3 attempts. */ | ||
| val default = Policy(_ => Duration.Zero, 3) | ||
| /** The default retry schedule. */ | ||
| val defaultSchedule = Schedule.exponentialBackoff(initial = 100.millis, factor = 2, maxDelay = 5.seconds) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
More sensible defaults
fwbrasil
force-pushed
the
schedule
branch
9 times, most recently
from
86d3be6
to
5a5777c
Compare
| * @return | ||
| * The earlier of the two Instants. | ||
| */ | ||
| def min(other: Instant): Instant = if instant.isBefore(other) then instant else other |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added infix to the correspondent methods in Schedule as well
| val next = Maybe((interval, this)) | ||
| def show = s"Schedule.fixed(${interval.show})" | ||
|
|
||
| final case class Exponential(initial: Duration, factor: Double) extends Schedule: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For all function based classes, would it make sense to have a single backing class?
I like the simplicity, but I wonder if this will be an issue for future binary compatibility. Regardless, should be a good amount of time before we need to focus on that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's ok in terms of binary compatibility since these are internal APIs. The goal of the different classes is for Schedule to automatically reduce to one of these canonical representations that can be compared for equality given that they're case classes. These tests show the functionality: https://github.com/getkyo/kyo/pull/733/files#diff-66ce2c17e23c73ff33f5e658a7ba3ef1972eb58d007873d50d795dae21a8e52dR578. I'm planning to use this behavior to optimize the execution of a new Timer implementation based on Schedule.
| * Schedule provides various combinators for creating complex scheduling policies. It can be used to define retry policies, periodic tasks, | ||
| * or any other time-based scheduling logic. | ||
| */ | ||
| sealed abstract class Schedule derives CanEqual: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I really like that this is immutable and very generic - not specific to Kyo.
| * @return | ||
| * a tuple containing the next delay duration and the updated schedule | ||
| */ | ||
| def next: Maybe[(Duration, Schedule)] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not in love with this signature. In general, I am not a fan of Tuples...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I had a withNext instead in one of the impls I pushed because of that. I decided to go back to the tuple because this is an API I'd expect users to rarely use directly and the tuple simplifies the implementation.
| * Schedule provides various combinators for creating complex scheduling policies. It can be used to define retry policies, periodic tasks, | ||
| * or any other time-based scheduling logic. | ||
| */ | ||
| sealed abstract class Schedule derives CanEqual: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For consistency, how would you feel about self =>?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think in this case it wouldn't matter? There aren't nested classes where this would be ambiguous
Inspired by ZIO's
Schedulebut as pure data structure.