-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 212
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
[Zoe] UserSeat.exit() and ZCFSeat.exit() should have same behavior? #1421
Comments
Since
The client can be reasonably expected to eitehr know by contruction or find out what exits are possible. Thus, there's no loss of function if calling There are exit cases (not currently supported) that are optional (e.g., "waived" or "only after a time but not automatic"), so alternatively it returns a boolean as to whether exit was allowed. |
But this is a major semantic difference between the two |
For the different names, what about |
Prefer `tryExit, but I'm good with either. Thanks. |
Renaming to |
What is the Problem Being Solved?
@erights had previously said that if
UserSeat.exit()
andZCFSeat.exit()
had the same name, they should have the same behavior. In other words, ifUserSeat.exit()
is present, the seat should be exited without condition, likeZCFSeat.exit()
. At the time, we thought that feature testingUserSeat.exit()
would work. But @dtribble pointed out thatUserSeat
will be a presence and feature testing doesn't work on presences. The current state ofzoe-release-branch
is thatUserSeat.exit
always exists but may or may not exit.We need to determine if this behavior is acceptable, or if there is a better solution.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: