Tetsuharu Ohzeki
Tetsuharu Ohzeki
Add the step to check subscriber's active state to next(value)/error(error)/complete() as a shortcut
> however, it seems that @tetsuharuohzeki [you'll need to link your account to a W3C account](https://labs.w3.org/repo-manager/pr/id/WICG/observable/129) to pass on of the checks above. > > https://github.com/WICG/observable/pull/129#issuecomment-2048472818 @benlesh I resolved that...
Add the step to check subscriber's active state to next(value)/error(error)/complete() as a shortcut
I'm sorry about no response for this issue. I'm working today to make _Subscriber_ concept's next/error/complete algorithm non-null as @domfarolino's suggestion. I seem it's possible but I also checking it's...
Add the step to check subscriber's active state to next(value)/error(error)/complete() as a shortcut
@domfarolino > Let me know if that doesn't make sense. I concern that your suggestion makes to allow infinite recursion accidentally. The current spec calls error steps or complete steps...
Add the step to check subscriber's active state to next(value)/error(error)/complete() as a shortcut
> > But your suggestion is that calling error steps or complete steps before "close subscription" and "run signal abort". > > No my suggestion is still calling the error...
Add the step to check subscriber's active state to next(value)/error(error)/complete() as a shortcut
I pushed the addressed commit.
@domfarolino > So if Subscriber#complete() only checked active, it will try and execute the complete steps, which may be null. By _[subscribe to an Observable](https://wicg.github.io/observable/#observable-subscribe-to-an-observable) concept_, the steps 2 lets...