You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: Part 3 - Taming the sequence/7. Custom operators.md
+16-6Lines changed: 16 additions & 6 deletions
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -183,17 +183,17 @@ Internally, every Rx operator does 3 things
183
183
2. It transforms the observed sequence according to the operator's purpose.
184
184
3. It pushes the modified sequence to its own subscribers, by calling `onNext`, `onError` and `onCompleted`.
185
185
186
-
The `compose` operator works with a method that makes an observable out of another. By doing this, it spares you the trouble of doing the 3 steps above manually. That presumes that you can do the transformation by using existing operators. If the operators don't already exist, or if you think you can get better performance manually, you need to receive items manually, process them and re-push them. An `Observable.Transformer` that does this would include a `subscribe`to the source `Observable` and the creation of a new `Observable` to be returned, possibly a `Subject`.
186
+
The `compose` operator works with a method that makes an observable out of another. In doing so, it spares you the trouble of doing the 3 steps above manually: the intermediate subscribing and pushing is implicit within an Rx chain. That presumes that you can do the transformation by using existing operators. If the operators don't already exist, you need to do the processing in the traditional Java OOP way. This means extracting the values from the pipeline and re-pushing when processed. An `Observable.Transformer` that does this would include an explicit subscription to the source `Observable` and/or the explicit creation of a new `Observable` to be returned.
187
187
188
-
There's a simpler way with `lift`. The `lift` operator is similar to `compose`. Instead of transforming `Observable`, it transforms `Subscriber`.
188
+
You'll find that this is often just boilerplate, and that you can avoid some of it by going to a lower level. The `lift` operator is similar to `compose`, with the difference of transforming a `Subscriber`, instead of an `Observable`.
189
189
190
190
```java
191
191
publicfinal<R>Observable<R> lift(Observable.Operator<? extends R,? super T> lift)
192
192
```
193
193
194
-
And `Observable.Operator<R,T>` is an alias for `Func1<Subscriber<? super R>,Subscriber<? super T>>`: a function that will transform a `Subscriber<R>` into `Subscriber<T>`. By dealing directly with `Subscriber` we avoid involving `Observable`.
194
+
And `Observable.Operator<R,T>` is an alias for `Func1<Subscriber<? super R>,Subscriber<? super T>>`: a function that will transform a `Subscriber<R>` into `Subscriber<T>`. By dealing directly with `Subscriber` we avoid involving `Observable`. The boilerplate of subscribing to and creating `Observable` types will be handled by lift.
195
195
196
-
This seems backwards at first: to turn an `Observable<T>` into `Observable<R>`, we need a function that turns `Subscriber<R>` into `Subscriber<T>`. To understand why that is the case, remember that a subscription begins at the end of the chain and is propagated to the source. In other words, a subscirption goes backwards through the chain of operators. Each operator receives a subscription (i.e. is subscribed to) and uses that subscription to create a subscription to the preceeding operator.
196
+
If you studied the signature, there's something which seems backwards at first: to turn an `Observable<T>` into `Observable<R>`, we need a function that turns `Subscriber<R>` into `Subscriber<T>`. To understand why that is the case, remember that a subscription begins at the end of the chain and is propagated to the source. In other words, a subscription goes backwards through the chain of operators. Each operator receives a subscription (i.e. is subscribed to) and uses that subscription to create a subscription to the preceeding operator.
197
197
198
198
In the next example, we will reimplement `map`, without using the existing implementation or any other existing operator.
199
199
@@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ Completed
299
299
Unsubscribed
300
300
```
301
301
302
-
Despite what our observable tried to emit, the end result obeyed the Rx contract. That happened because `subscribe`will temrinate the subscription when the sequence terminates (or was supposed to have terminated). This doesn't mean that the problem will always be taken care for us. There is also a method called `unsafeSubscribe`, which won't unsubscribe automatically.
302
+
Despite what our observable tried to emit, the end result obeyed the Rx contract. That happened because `subscribe`terminated the subscription when it (very reasonably) thought that the sequence ended. This doesn't mean that the problem will always be taken care for us. There is also a method called `unsafeSubscribe`, which won't unsubscribe automatically.
Our subscriber's intended behaviour was identical to the previous example (we created an instance of `Subscriber` because `unsafeSubscribe` doesn't have overloads that take lambdas). However, we can see here we weren't unsubscribed and we kept receiving notifications.
340
+
Our subscriber's intended behaviour was identical to the previous example (we created an instance of `Subscriber` because `unsafeSubscribe` doesn't have overloads that take lambdas). However, we can see here we weren't unsubscribed and we kept receiving notifications.
341
341
342
342
`unsafeSubscribe` is unsafe in other regards as well, such as error handling. It's usefulness is limited. The documentation says that it should only be used for custom operators that use nested subscriptions. To protect such operators from receiving and illegal sequence, we can apply the `serialize` operator
343
343
@@ -388,6 +388,16 @@ We here that, despite the fact that we did not unsubscribe, the illegal notifica
388
388
If the ability to use your custom operator in the chain like a standard operator is not convincing enough, using `lift` has one more unexpected advantage. Standard operators are also implemented using `lift`, which makes `lift` a hot method at runtime. JVM optimises for `lift` and operators that use `lift` receive a performance boost. That can include your operator, if you use `lift`.
389
389
390
390
391
+
## Choosing between `lift` and `compose`
392
+
393
+
Both `lift` and `compose` are meta-operators, used for injecting a custom operator into the chain. In both cases, the custom operator can be implemented as a function or a class.
394
+
*`compose`: `Observable.Transformer` or `Func<Observable<TSource>, Observable<TReturn>>`
395
+
*`lift`: `Observable.Operator` or `Func<Subscriber<TReturn>, Subscriber<TSource>>`
396
+
397
+
Theoretically, any operator can be implemented as both `Observable.Operator` and `Observable.Transformer`. The choice between the two is a question of convenience, and what kind of boilerplate you want to avoid.
398
+
399
+
* If the custom operator is a composite of existing operators, `compose` is a natural fit.
400
+
* If the custom operator needs to extract values from the pipeline to process them and then push them back, `lift` is a better fit.
The content of this book is meant to be read from start to finish. It begins with the basics and every subsequent chapter introduces increasingly advanced features and concepts. Sections of the book are intended to be self-containing and to-the-point, so that the book can be referred back to by non-beginners.
12
+
13
+
The examples used in the book are also [available in complilable](/tests/java/itrx) java files in two formats:
14
+
* Examples that print to standard output (recommended for first-time readers)
15
+
* Silent, self-checking examples in the form of [JUnit](http://junit.org/) tests.
16
+
The readers are invited to study whichever style suits them best.
0 commit comments