Closed
Conversation
The test is now ignored and not disabled, and the invocation to run it has changed.
It was only async to allow waiting until the port was available. The caller can do that itself, and then the constructor is easier to use with a static context.
No doubt still some room for improvement, but this seems to work as a proof of concept.
I bet there's a way to make the `complete_order()` signature less gross, but I'm pretty noob-ish with async rust and the generics get unwieldly quick.
Feels like there's still room to cut down on the boilerplate in the top-level tests.
Collaborator
Author
|
Going to close this for now. I want to take another pass and try to make something less underbaked. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Following up on our discussion in #75. Here's where I got after an hour or two of fiddling around.
It's a bit messy and I'm holding sync lock guards across await points so clippy isn't pleased. I think the guard type I worked up is pretty poor in general, but it's a place to start.
I also tried to generalize a bit of the order handling logic and got something workable w/ the provisioning callback but I think there's plenty of room for improvement.