Conversation
|
|
||
| // TODO: seems buggy if you remove A and B here, MyActivityProcessor(C).OnEnd is not called. | ||
| // TODO: should the dispose order be C, B, A or A, B C? | ||
| .AddProcessorPipeline(p => p.AddProcessor(current => new MyActivityProcessor("A"))) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is adding multiple processor pipelines. I guess you wanted to add multiple processors to the same, single pipeline?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nope, I was using this to showcase how pipeline could be confusing, and I think we need to change it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The fan out scenario is a separate topic, and the name should be changed #979.
| public MyActivityProcessor() | ||
| private readonly string name; | ||
|
|
||
| public MyActivityProcessor(string name) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Need to take the next ActivityProcessor, and call its corresponding methods in Start/End/etc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For demonstration I was trying to make it simple by not chaining the processors at all.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #996 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 68.41% 68.47% +0.06%
==========================================
Files 220 220
Lines 6002 6002
Branches 983 983
==========================================
+ Hits 4106 4110 +4
+ Misses 1621 1619 -2
+ Partials 275 273 -2
|
reyang
changed the title
2 participants
Trying to use the docs and tutorial projects to drive for better design and implementation.
This change should give us some idea about the processor use case.
I plan to work on the sampler and exporter tutorial projects in the next few PRs, then we can use these projects to question ourselves "are these the developer experience we want and are there places we can improve" - similar like what we did here.
Changes
Added multiple processors demo.