-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 734
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
clarify span enter warning #2010
Merged
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
hawkw
approved these changes
Mar 22, 2022
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thanks, I think this is a bit clearer for sure!
hawkw
reviewed
Mar 22, 2022
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
one potential suggestion, let me know what you think!
hawkw
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 29, 2022
## Motivation It took me several reads to understand why holding a guard over an await was bad because my brain is naturally synchronous and could only think about `my_async_function` and `some_other_async_function` ## Solution Rather than just iterating "this is bad" use that opportunity to introduce why. Remind the user that this is being executed concurrently to other tasks Co-authored-by: Eliza Weisman <[email protected]>
hawkw
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 29, 2022
## Motivation It took me several reads to understand why holding a guard over an await was bad because my brain is naturally synchronous and could only think about `my_async_function` and `some_other_async_function` ## Solution Rather than just iterating "this is bad" use that opportunity to introduce why. Remind the user that this is being executed concurrently to other tasks Co-authored-by: Eliza Weisman <[email protected]>
hawkw
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 9, 2022
# 0.1.33 (April 9, 2022) This release adds new `span_enabled!` and `event_enabled!` variants of the `enabled!` macro, for testing whether a subscriber would specifically enable a span or an event. ### Added - `span_enabled!` and `event_enabled!` macros ([#1900]) - Several documentation improvements ([#2010], [#2012]) ### Fixed - Compilation warning when compiling for <=32-bit targets (including `wasm32`) ([#2060]) Thanks to @guswynn, @arifd, @hrxi, @CAD97, and @name1e5s for contributing to this release! [#1900]: #1900 [#2010]: #2010 [#2012]: #2012 [#2060]: #2060
hawkw
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 9, 2022
# 0.1.33 (April 9, 2022) This release adds new `span_enabled!` and `event_enabled!` variants of the `enabled!` macro, for testing whether a subscriber would specifically enable a span or an event. ### Added - `span_enabled!` and `event_enabled!` macros ([#1900]) - Several documentation improvements ([#2010], [#2012]) ### Fixed - Compilation warning when compiling for <=32-bit targets (including `wasm32`) ([#2060]) Thanks to @guswynn, @arifd, @hrxi, @CAD97, and @name1e5s for contributing to this release! [#1900]: #1900 [#2010]: #2010 [#2012]: #2012 [#2060]: #2060
kaffarell
pushed a commit
to kaffarell/tracing
that referenced
this pull request
May 22, 2024
# 0.1.33 (April 9, 2022) This release adds new `span_enabled!` and `event_enabled!` variants of the `enabled!` macro, for testing whether a subscriber would specifically enable a span or an event. ### Added - `span_enabled!` and `event_enabled!` macros ([tokio-rs#1900]) - Several documentation improvements ([tokio-rs#2010], [tokio-rs#2012]) ### Fixed - Compilation warning when compiling for <=32-bit targets (including `wasm32`) ([tokio-rs#2060]) Thanks to @guswynn, @arifd, @hrxi, @CAD97, and @name1e5s for contributing to this release! [tokio-rs#1900]: tokio-rs#1900 [tokio-rs#2010]: tokio-rs#2010 [tokio-rs#2012]: tokio-rs#2012 [tokio-rs#2060]: tokio-rs#2060
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.
Motivation
It took me several reads to understand why holding a guard over an await was bad
because my brain is naturally synchronous and could only think about
my_async_function
andsome_other_async_function
Solution
Rather than just iterating "this is bad" use that opportunity to introduce why. Remind the user that this is being executed concurrently to other tasks