Add AsyncPageable scope validation #17635
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
ghost
added
the
JoshLove-msft
approved these changes
Dec 17, 2020
pakrym
requested review from
amishra-dev,
amnguye,
kasobol-msft,
seanmcc-msft and
tg-msft
as code owners
pakrym
requested review from
ankitarorabit,
DominikMe,
RezaJooyandeh and
a team
as code owners
| @@ -705,7 +705,7 @@ private Request CreateGetRequest(string key, string label, DateTimeOffset accept | |||
| /// <param name="cancellationToken">A <see cref="CancellationToken"/> controlling the request lifetime.</param> | |||
| private async Task<Page<ConfigurationSetting>> GetConfigurationSettingsPageAsync(SettingSelector selector, string pageLink, CancellationToken cancellationToken = default) | |||
| { | |||
| using DiagnosticScope scope = _clientDiagnostics.CreateScope($"{nameof(ConfigurationClient)}.{nameof(GetConfigurationSettingsPage)}"); | |||
| using DiagnosticScope scope = _clientDiagnostics.CreateScope($"{nameof(ConfigurationClient)}.{nameof(GetConfigurationSettings)}"); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will these changes be a problem for existing customers given that this is a GA library?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm reluctant to treat this as a breaking change. The scenarios where this would break anyone are pretty theoretical.
pakrym
requested review from
arv100kri,
bleroy,
brjohnstmsft,
heaths and
Mohit-Chakraborty
as code owners
…able-scope-validation # Conflicts: # eng/Packages.Data.props
|
Hello @pakrym! Because this pull request has the p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (
|
ghost
merged commit | bool strict = !invocation.Method.GetCustomAttributes(true).Any(a => a.GetType().FullName == "Azure.Core.ForwardsClientCallsAttribute"); | ||
| if (invocation.Method.ReturnType.Name.Contains("Pageable") || | ||
| invocation.Method.ReturnType.Name.Contains("IAsyncEnumerable")) | ||
| if (invocation.Method.ReturnType is {IsGenericType: true} genericType && |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why don't we add the validator for Pageable in addition to AsyncPageable?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This validator runs before we forward calls from async->sync so everything would look sync to it.
annelo-msft
pushed a commit
to annelo-msft/azure-sdk-for-net
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 17, 2021
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Fixes: #17633