-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 288
Documentation improvements #343
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Documentation improvements #343
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Petros Angelatos <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Petros Angelatos <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Petros Angelatos <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Petros Angelatos <[email protected]>
mdbook/src/chapter_2/chapter_2_4.md
Outdated
The heart of the logic lies in the closure that binds `input` and `output`. These two are handles respectively to the operator's input (from which it can read records) and the operator's output (to which it can send records). | ||
|
||
The input handle `input` has one primary method, `next`, which may return a pair of timestamp and batch of data. Rust really likes you to demonstrate a commitment to only looking at valid data, and our `while` loop does what is called deconstruction: we acknowledge the optional structure and only execute in the case the `Option` variant is `Some`, containing data. The `next` method could also return `None`, indicating that there is no more data available at the moment. It is strongly recommended that you take the hint and stop trying to read inputs at that point; timely gives you the courtesy of executing whatever code you want in this closure, but if you never release control back to the system you'll break things (timely employs ["cooperative multitasking"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_multitasking)). | ||
The input handle `input` has one primary method, `next`, which may return a pair of timestamps and a batch of data. Rust really likes you to demonstrate a commitment to only looking at valid data, and our `while` loop does what is called deconstruction: we acknowledge the optional structure and only execute in the case the `Option` variant is `Some`, containing data. The `next` method could also return `None`, indicating that there is no more data available at the moment. It is strongly recommended that you take the hint and stop trying to read inputs at that point; timely gives you the courtesy of executing whatever code you want in this closure, but if you never release control back to the system you'll break things (timely employs ["cooperative multitasking"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_multitasking)). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think is this is not correct. It is a pair of a timestamp and a batch of data. Strictly speaking, it is a pair of a capability (a Capability<Timestamp>
, for linking purposes) and a batch of data. None of this is on you, though. I can clean it up in post if you prefer!
Seems good, thanks! I left one comment that you can take/leave (I'll patch it up afterwards if you'd rather not). |
Signed-off-by: Petros Angelatos <[email protected]>
@frankmcsherry you're right, I missed that. I just pushed a fix for that |
Thanks very much (and thanks for checking the actual type; oops!). |
Did a few spelling and grammar fixes while going through the docs and also updated all links to use the new link-to-item markdown syntax.