feat: Enable use of WorkflowCombineTesting without specifying a concrete Publisher type#387
Open
feat: Enable use of WorkflowCombineTesting without specifying a concrete Publisher type#387
Conversation
…ete Publisher type
amorde
force-pushed
the
amorde/combine-testing-expect-without-publisher-type
branch
from
ad4a1ee to
d71f5ee
Compare
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Changes
expectPublisher(producingOutput:key:)API that is generic only over the output of the publisher ratherPublisherWorkflowto only be generic over the output rather than the Publisher typeRationale
The current API shape requires that tests pass in a concrete
Publishertype. This can be quite tedious depending on the context, resulting in having to pass in types likePublishers.Map<AnyPublisher<Bool, Never>, AnyWorkflowAction<SomeWorkflow>>>.This differs from
WorkflowReactiveSwift, for example, which has a workflow that is only generic over the output and has anexpectAPI that only requires providing the output typeChecklist