Update to new EndConsumerHelper implementation #76
Labels
Comments
ZacSweers
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 31, 2017
Resolves #76 From the original PR: This PR changes the "Disposable already set!" and "Subscription already set!" messages on the standard consumer classes (DisposableSubscriber, DisposableObserver, etc.) to something more meaningful: "It is not allowed to subscribe with a(n) <class name> multiple times. Please create a fresh instance of <class name> and subscribe that to the target source instead." Where <class name> is a placeholder for the getClass().getName() of the subclass of those consumer types. It should clearly state to avoid subscribing with them multiple times as well as printing the full class name to indicate the problem is with the use of the implementor class, and not with the abstract RxJava class. Inspired by [this Stackoverflow](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/43482263/rxjava2-protocolviolationexception-disposable-already-set) question, one of many such questions. For the internal operators, the original error message stays because when they appear, that is still likely due to an implementation bug (or a misbehaving user-created custom implementation).
ZacSweers
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Sep 4, 2017
* Opportunistic formatting fixes * Update to EndConsumerHelper Resolves #76 From the original PR: This PR changes the "Disposable already set!" and "Subscription already set!" messages on the standard consumer classes (DisposableSubscriber, DisposableObserver, etc.) to something more meaningful: "It is not allowed to subscribe with a(n) <class name> multiple times. Please create a fresh instance of <class name> and subscribe that to the target source instead." Where <class name> is a placeholder for the getClass().getName() of the subclass of those consumer types. It should clearly state to avoid subscribing with them multiple times as well as printing the full class name to indicate the problem is with the use of the implementor class, and not with the abstract RxJava class. Inspired by [this Stackoverflow](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/43482263/rxjava2-protocolviolationexception-disposable-already-set) question, one of many such questions. For the internal operators, the original error message stays because when they appear, that is still likely due to an implementation bug (or a misbehaving user-created custom implementation). * Fix checkstyle
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
ReactiveX/RxJava#5301
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: