edit: The `App` interface has just one implementation which adds the ~4
builtin "Runnables". It is used to implement 5-10 different services each
of which adds its custom "Runnables".
On Wednesday, November 15, 2023 at 7:06:08 AM UTC-5 grant wrote:
> I've stumbled upon a set of interfaces that doesn't feel quite right, but
> I can't say why exactly.
>
> ```
> type (
> Named interface {
> Name() string
> }
> App interface {
> Named
> Run() error
> Shutdown()
> }
> // Runnable typically represents a MQTT or HTTP listener
> Runnable interface {
> Named
> Run(ctx context.Context) error
> Shutdown(ctx context.Context) error
> }
> )
> ```
> There are 5-10 app implementations, each of which implements ~3
> "Runnables" on top of ~4 builtin "Runnables".
>
> One problem I can see with the above is the ambiguity of `Shutdown` -
> shouldn't it suffice to cancel the run context? The most analogous stdlib
> construct is probably the http package's server, whose `ListenAndServe`
> doesn't take context, but that code probably predates the context package.
>
> What would be an idiomatic way to design these interfaces? Or is their
> mere existence a no-Go?
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/adb2519b-ac38-41df-b267-7562b851cfddn%40googlegroups.com.
