Callback class

[holderbaum]

This optional addon allows creation of a semi-static callback-class. It's kind of semantic sugar.

[splattael]

Nice! Can you squash the commits please?

[splattael]

Mh, I already have a spike on class implementation for on.
Can you look at the on-class-spike branch?
Especially on https://github.com/neopoly/on/blob/on-class-spike/lib/on/class.rb

My attempt is different, though.

WDYT?

[holderbaum]

Squashed!

I dont think those to features are similar. Your class implementation is for the caller, so he can encapsulate the callback-block into a class.

My class implementation is for encapsulating the callback-triggering of the callee.

Don't you thing both features are neat? :)

[splattael]

Well, it depends.

My solution encourages you to create "callback" classes a la:

class MyCallback
  include On::Class

  def on_success
    ...
  end
end

Your solution seems to be "just" a syntatic sugar on how to create on callbacks.
Of course you can do:

class MyCallback < On::Class::CallbackClass
  callbacks :success
end

But I don't see the point of doing the above. Can you explain?

Yes, these are different features. We have to name them distinctly :)

[holderbaum]

class UserCreating
  Callback = On::Class.build(:success, :failure)
  Response = Struct.new(:user_id)

  def initialize(user_name)
    @user_name = user_name
  end

  def create(&block)
    back = Callback.new(&block)

    user = user_repo.create(:user_name => @user_name)

    if user
      back.call :success, Response.new(user.id)
    else
      back.call :failure
    end
  end
end

class Call
  include On::Class

  def on_success(response)
    p :id => response.user_id
  end

  def on_failure
    # :(
  end
end

UserCreating.new('peter').create(&(Call.new))

Despite the naming-clash, those are the two usecases combined. I thought about this Class-implementation, because it cleans up the usecase action-method.

If you want to, I can name On::Class to On::Callback, this would still make sense in a semantic way. :)

[splattael]

Ok, got it. Good example!

Sadly, Callback is already used in On.

I'd like to see On::Callback.create(:success, :failure). WDYT?

class UserCreating
  Callback = On::Callback.create(:success, :failure)
  # or
  Callback = On.callback(:succes, :failure)
...

My approch in on-class-spike is more "listener" class style. Maybe it should be named that way...

[holderbaum]

Agreed! A Class named Class is perhaps just a bad idea, independent to the usecase! :)

If I think it true, even Callback is semantically wrong. The internal class Callback uses this term correctly. The feature I proposed is more something like a Caller? Or even another term, more distinct from pre- or postfixes to CALL.

Perhaps the feature could be embedded into On without such terminology?

Callback = On.create(:success, :failure)
# or 
Callback = On.to_class(:success, :failure)

On::Listener could be a great constant for your Class-Feature, since this describes nearly perfect its purpose.

[splattael]

Mh

Callback = On.create(:success, :failure)
# or 
Callback = On.to_class(:success, :failure)

reads kind of ugly, isn't :/

@holderbaum enable your naming-power. NOW!! :)

[holderbaum]

NAMINGPOWER ENABLED 👊

Callback = On::Back.new(:success, :failure)
# this one is still my favourite:
Callback = On::Callback.new(:success, :failure)

Is there any Chance, we can rename the innerclass Callback?
@splattael enable you rename-power! =)

[shluboto]

:)

Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android Mobiltelefon mit GMX Mail gesendet.

Jakob Holderbaum notifications@github.com schrieb:

NAMINGPOWER ENABLED

Callback = On::Back.new(:success, :failure) # this one is still my favourite: Callback = On::Callback.new(:success, :failure)

Is there any Chance, we can rename the innerclass Callback?
@splattael enable you rename-power! =)

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.