Expose concurrency parameter of mergeScan

[kwonoj]

While MergeScanOperator has implementation to accept concurrency parameter

constructor(private project: (acc: R, x: T) => Observable<R>,
              private seed: R,
              private concurrent: number = Number.POSITIVE_INFINITY)

type definition of mergeScan does not allow to use it.

mergeScan<T, R>(project: (acc: R, x: T) => Observable<R>, seed: R).

Would it be better to expose concurrency parameter?

[benlesh]

Probably, yes.

[kwonoj]

Cool, I'll try with expanding test coverage.

[kwonoj]

Maybe I'm incorrect, came to curious if concurrency of mergeScan is really being used compare to merge. @Blesh , may I possibly ask to shed some light to my understandings?

[benlesh]

mergeScan is definitely looking at the concurrent value, it's just not being set from the actual operator function.

https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxJS/blob/f1dc76494cd0b134cd4682503cc479fc6afcbf8c/src/operator/extended/mergeScan.ts#L45

[kwonoj]

definitely looking at the concurrent value

: Yes, that's part where I started this issue. I'll think bit more to bring up some code snippets if possible.

[kwonoj]

It's simply my dumb understandings about questions above for usage of concurrency :( will continue work on this, thanks @Blesh .

[benlesh]

I can't think of any use cases for changing the concurrency of this, really. But I can see the utility of it.

@trxcllnt, what's a use case for concurrency in mergeScan?

[trxcllnt]

@Blesh same as the case for merge. mergeScan(1) is actually concatScan().

[benlesh]

@trxcllnt That's fair, I was just wondering more like "when would I use this"? That sort of use case.

[lock]

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.