[ST-NNNN] Polling Confirmations #2926
Open
Conversation
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
stmontgomery
added
the
TWG
stmontgomery
reviewed
Aug 1, 2025
stmontgomery
added
the
workgroup: needs development
grynspan
reviewed
Sep 9, 2025
younata
changed the title
…c group names. The text of SE-0443 uses snake case diagnostic group names, but in practice we've settled on using Pascal case for diagnostic group names. Additionally, the name `DeprecatedDeclaration` was chosen for the deprecation diagnostic group. I think it would be best for the proposal to reflect both of these stylistic choices so that it can serve as accurate documentation for the feature in practice.
* First draft of InlineArray sugar proposal * Add flattened array future direction * Add alternative of of * flesh out alternatives considered * Clarify x is a keyword * typo * Assign `InlineArray` type sugar to SE-0483 and put into review. * Fix a missing link to SE-0453. --------- Co-authored-by: Holly Borla <[email protected]>
…and an adjustment to the naming of `Observed` to now name as `Observations` (swiftlang#2838) * Address the rounds of feedback with some more behavioral refinements and an adjustment to the naming of `Observed` to now name as `Observations` * Correct the next to last example to the latest mechansim's output
…ess documentation (swiftlang#2842)
…tlang#2814) * Add proposal for Allow Additional Arguments to `@dynamicMemberLookup` Subscripts * Incorporate pitch thread feedback * Update review manager * Assign SE-0484 --------- Co-authored-by: Xiaodi Wu <[email protected]>
…to evaluate the expression after it passes
I'm working on it, but macros are hard.
- Change the default timeout. - Change how unexpected thrown errors are treated. - Add future direction to add change monitoring via Observation - Add alternative considered of Just Use A While Loop - Add alternative considered for shorter default timeouts
- Include commenting on why not pure counts (i.e. why counts + interval) - Specify the configuration traits - Specify callsite configuration of counts + interval
… do not have a configurable clock
…n on when polling should not be used.
Co-authored-by: Jonathan Grynspan <[email protected]>
younata
force-pushed
the
younata/testing-polling-expectations
branch
from
c602e5f to
4fafc61
Compare
…t to mention that duration may be greater than or equal to interval
|
Looks like there's some merge or rebase issue, files besides the new proposal are being shown as modified |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
21 participants
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.
New proposal for Swift Testing: Polling Confirmations.
These allow test authors to check that state updates over the course of some amount of time, in a very brute-force kind of way. Very helpful when there aren't other means of checking this available.