feat(cache): remove cache operator#2012
feat(cache): remove cache operator#2012jayphelps merged 1 commit intoReactiveX:masterfrom benlesh:remove_cache
cache operator#2012Conversation
|
I'm very very 👍 , but since there's a chance this is controversial, going to wait for others to chime in. |
|
I'm 👍 too. If it's debatable about behavior need to be settled down, better to make it once instead of changing behavior over different release which can cause confusion. |
|
LGTM |
|
LGTM "Cache invalidation" |
Because of all of the confusion around the `cache` operator, this removes the operator from RxJS head of the 5.0.0 release. This is done for a few reasons\: 1. The name `cache` implies it supports all sorts of caching strategies, when this is pretty limited 2. Behavior around unending and hot observables is hard to reason about 3. Once we have a properly designed `cache` operator we can add it at a later time and it will not be a breaking change
The `cache()` operator was removed by ReactiveX/rxjs#2012. Since this is still a prerelease (and Flow doesn't yet support prerelease versions), we'll just remove it.
The `cache()` operator was removed by ReactiveX/rxjs#2012. Since this is still a prerelease (and Flow doesn't yet support prerelease versions), we'll just remove it.
This method was removed from RxJS-5.0.0 release (ReactiveX/rxjs#2012). Maybe some caching alternative could be implemented later. For now, it needs to be removed to make the library usable again (OmniSharp/omnisharp-atom#880).
|
Hey guys. I can't seem to find a simple alternative to Thanks! |
|
It takes me some time to finger out that the I think the better way to remove |
|
@zixia sorry about the confusion. We made the change back in October when v5 was in beta, where we do not make any guarantees about API stability and deprecation cycles. Some of us have talked about possibly doing deprecation warnings if we do similar sweeping removals for future major versions e.g. v6, v7, etc. but we haven't commited to anything cause we don't yet have any such changes. The only breaking change we have queued up is #2174 which slightly changes the behavior of the buffer operator--it's a bugfix, but since it's a breaking bugfix we're holding off on releasing it until v6. |
|
This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
10 participants
Because of all of the confusion around the
cacheoperator, this removes the operatorfrom RxJS ahead of the 5.0.0 release. This is done for a few reasons:
cacheimplies it supports all sorts of caching strategies, when this is pretty limitedcacheoperator we can add it at a later time and it will not be a breaking change