Replace custom retry code with decorator library #2
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This isn't much better than having a custom retry function: - The library isn't maintained [1], and the only other fork doesn't accept issues [2]. - The default setting for the logger interferes with testing for logger outputs. - The syntax is still verbose (versus [3]) and a wrapper function is still necessary. On the whole it's good enough for now, and doesn't preclude having a custom package in future if this one stops working. [1]: invl/retry#36 [2]: https://github.com/eSAMTrade/retry [3]: invl/retry#50
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This isn't much better than having a custom retry function:
The library isn't maintained 1, and the only other fork doesn't
accept issues 2.
The default setting for the logger interferes with testing for
logger outputs.
The syntax is still verbose (versus 3) and a wrapper function
is still necessary.
On the whole it's good enough for now, and doesn't preclude having
a custom package in future if this one stops working.