Cancel preparation tasks for editor functionality if the preparation task hasn't been started yet and the document is no longer active #1323
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
ahoppen
force-pushed
the
dont-stack-preparation-for-editor
branch
from
10df160 to
17e9205
Compare
ahoppen
changed the title
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
@swift-ci Please test Linux |
ahoppen
force-pushed
the
dont-stack-preparation-for-editor
branch
from
17e9205 to
99d7a88
Compare
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
@swift-ci Please test Windows |
|
@swift-ci Please test Linux |
|
@swift-ci Please test Windows |
ahoppen
force-pushed
the
dont-stack-preparation-for-editor
branch
from
99d7a88 to
bb1529c
Compare
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
@swift-ci Please test Windows |
1 similar comment
|
@swift-ci Please test Windows |
…task hasn't been started yet and the document is no longer active When the user opens documents from three targets A, B, and C in quick succession, then we don’t want to schedule preparation of wait until A *and* B are finished preparing before preparing C. Instead, we want to - Finish for preparation of A to finish if it has already started by the time the file in C is opened. This is done so we always make progress during preparation and don’t get into a scenario where preparation is always cancelled if a user switches between two targets more quickly than it takes to prepare those targets. - Not prepare B because it is no longer relevant and we haven’t started any progress here. Essentially, we pretend that the hop to B never happened.
ahoppen
force-pushed
the
dont-stack-preparation-for-editor
branch
from
bb1529c to
41b810b
Compare
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
@swift-ci Please test Windows |
1 similar comment
|
@swift-ci Please test Windows |
bnbarham
reviewed
May 23, 2024
Comment on lines
+322
to
+324
| if inProgressPrepareForEditorTask?.id == id { | ||
| inProgressPrepareForEditorTask = nil | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When is just checking document not enough?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- You open document A and it gets prepared for editor functionality
- You open document B, which should cancel the preparation for A, cancellation doesn’t get checked at this exact moment, so A’s preparation continues running for a bit longer
- You open document A again
- The preparation of A from (1) finishes now and gets to this state. But the preparation of A from (3) is still running, so we can’t set
inProgressPrepareForEditorTasktonil
Checking Task.isCancelled before setting inProgressPrepareForEditorTask to nil also isn’t an option because that would mean that inProgressPrepareForEditorTask got cancelled without a new preparation for editor task beings scheduled. I don’t think that can happen right now but it’s not unreasonable to assume that inProgressPrepareForEditorTask could get cancelled for whichever reason in the future.
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.
When the user opens documents from three targets A, B, and C in quick succession, then we don’t want to schedule preparation of wait until A and B are finished preparing before preparing C.
Instead, we want to