Handling Exceptions in Reactive Extensions without stopping sequence

Question

Why RX has the following grammar OnNext* (OnError|OnCompleted)? instead of (OnNext|OnError)* OnCompleted? This is quite clear from implementation p

Answer 1

OnError is meant to be a message that an unrecoverable error occurred so that the stream should be reset. After the recovery, next events don't make sense in the context of events that happened before the exception.

For example, consider the stream of events:

• User joined the chat
• User joined the chat
• !! Chat crashed so all users are kicked
• User joined the chat

Now the stream consumer use the Aggregate function to display the number of chatters. What should be displayed at the end? Of course 1, not 3. We should start counting from the scratch after the exception.

Answer 2

If the consumer is the one that knows if the Exception is expected or not, then I say that throwing exceptions is incorrect here.

You're essentially trying to convey state or logic, which exceptions are not meant to do. Exceptions are meant to bring the system (or at the very least, the current operation) to a grinding halt because something has happened which the code doesn't inherently know how to recover from.

In this case, it just so happens that an Exception is part of your business logic/state, but that doesn't mean you can throw them. You need to pass them downstream to your consumer and then have your consumer process them.

A Tuple<T, Exception> would work in a pinch here, but the lack of specificity around the type (as well as the properties) is usually messy, so I'd recommend creating a dedicated type to convey the results of your operation and is exposed through the IObservable<T>.

Answer 3

ValueOrException looks like Either type from functional programming. You have just swapped Left and Right. By convention Right is used for success and Left for failure.