docs: document setProviderAndWait in README #610
Conversation
- Updated the setProviderAndWait example in the quick start section - Expand the provider's section to show both the async and synchronous options. Signed-off-by: Yash <[email protected]>
README.md
Outdated
| #### Asynchronous Named Provider Configuration | ||
|
|
||
| To register providers asynchronously, ensuring they are initialized before further actions are taken, you can use the `setProviderAndWait` method as shown below: | ||
|
|
||
| ```java | ||
| FeatureProvider scopedProvider = new MyProvider(); | ||
|
|
||
| // registering the default provider | ||
| // registering the default provider asynchronously | ||
| OpenFeatureAPI.getInstance().setProviderAndWait(LocalProvider()); | ||
| // registering a named provider asynchronously | ||
| OpenFeatureAPI.getInstance().setProviderAndWait("clientForCache", new CachedProvider()); | ||
|
|
||
| // a client backed by the default provider | ||
| Client clientDefault = OpenFeatureAPI.getInstance().getClient(); | ||
| // a client backed by CachedProvider | ||
| Client clientNamed = OpenFeatureAPI.getInstance().getClient("clientForCache"); | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| #### Synchronous Named Provider Configuration | ||
|
|
||
| For synchronous provider registration, where you set the provider without waiting for initialization, you can use the `setProvider` method directly, as shown in the following example: | ||
|
|
||
| ```java | ||
| FeatureProvider scopedProvider = new MyProvider(); | ||
|
|
||
| // registering the default provider synchronously |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think you need to repeat yourself here. Just mention that named providers can be set in a blocking/non-blocking way, and then link to the previous doc you wrote above.
toddbaert
changed the title
toddbaert
changed the title
toddbaert
changed the title
- blocking / non-blocking terms added in Providers section - removed repetition of code and added link in Named clients Signed-off-by: Yash <[email protected]>
|
Hey @toddbaert, thank you for your guidance! I've made the requested changes. Please take a look at them and let me know if there's anything else I need to improve. |
|
@code4Y you can disregard the CI failure. It's not related to your change. |
|
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!
|
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #610 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 94.45% 94.81% +0.35%
- Complexity 360 362 +2
============================================
Files 32 32
Lines 848 848
Branches 52 52
============================================
+ Hits 801 804 +3
+ Misses 25 23 -2
+ Partials 22 21 -1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. see 2 files with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
This PR
setProviderAndWaitexample in the quick start sectionRelated Issues
Update readme examples to include
setProviderAndWaitFixes #592
Notes
If there are any corrections, please let me know.