question about buffer operators

[snackycracky]

Hello, why do operators such as bufferWhen that call a users function every time they open a new buffer/window don't let you react to values going through ?
I would like to flush the buffer when some condition on the buffered accumulation is met.

[snackycracky]

I mean, is there a reason for this design? I am sure it was discussed before.

[benlesh]

cc @mattpodwysocki ... bufferWhen is based off of one of behaviors of buffer from RxJS 4 and under. I'm not sure what the rationale was with the design... only how I've used it.

Referring to The Man himself for the design info. 🙌

[snackycracky]

this question is based on an answer on so: https://stackoverflow.com/q/48526452/170881

[snackycracky]

@mattpodwysocki ping ping :)

[BioPhoton]

@snackycracky Is your request still relevant?
If not, would you mind closing this issue? If yes please let me know. :)

[snackycracky]

Hey @mattpodwysocki :) what is the design reasoning behind the limitation that operators such as bufferWhen that call a users function every time they open a new buffer/window don't let you react to values going through ?
I would like to flush the buffer when some condition on the buffered accumulation is met.

[BioPhoton]

Hi @snackycracky

Could you provide the condition in the trigger observable?

const fakeSource = of(1,2,42,3,4,2,3,6,42,1,2,3,1,42)
  .pipe(delay(100),share());

const conditionMet = fakeSource.pipe(filter(v => v === 42));
fakeSource.pipe(
  buffer(conditionMet)
).subscribe(x => console.log(x));

Does that help?

[BioPhoton]

Hi @snackycracky!

I tried hard to get your desired answer. I pinged multiple people. And I had to give up on this.
I'm sorry I could not help you further.

If you would be so kind and close this issue and help to keep the number of open issues small.

Best Michael

[snackycracky]

Thanks Michael for your hard work, but no. I will post the answer whenever I find it and then close this „hard to answer“ question.

…

On 30. Nov 2019, at 04:40, Michael Hladky ***@***.***> wrote:  Hi @snackycracky! I tried hard to get your desired answer. I pinged multiple people. And I had to give up on this. I'm sorry I could not help you further. If you would be so kind and close this issue and help to keep the number of open issues small. Best Michael — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

[BioPhoton]

Thanks @snackycracky!

There might be the chance that i meet Matt in 2020 so I can ask.

Other than that I have no chance to figure out the real intentions of Matt and the initial design in rxjs.

Feel free to reopen ask or open a new issue.
🙏