Introduce actor factories #1744
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
This removes unnecessary fields and allows more flexibility in tests.
|
I don't really like factories in general, but I don't know a better way of solving your problem, and I have to say it looks pretty clean. Regarding names, I would have gone with |
Done in 52af730 |
pm47
approved these changes
Mar 30, 2021
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
We'd like to provide an abstraction for child actors creation, otherwise our actors become too tightly coupled and hard to test in isolation. But we don't want to move too much business logic outside of the actor (for instance the choice of child supervision strategy).
I'm going with a simple ad-hoc factory pattern in this PR, which removes unnecessary fields in actor constructors and allows more flexibility in tests. I must say I'm not entirely satisfied, but can't find a simple alternative (it's important to have a simple solution here, I don't want to make it harder for readers of the code).
If you have a better naming for the concrete Factory classes, let me know!