👔 (webhid) [NO-ISSUE]: Update reconnection error sending

[valpinkman]

📝 Description

Check for the timing between reconnection before sending an error everytime.

❓ Context

• JIRA or GitHub link: [NO-ISSUE]

• Feature:

✅ Checklist

Pull Requests must pass CI checks and undergo code review. Set the PR as Draft if it is not yet ready for review.

• Covered by automatic tests
• Changeset is provided
• Impact of the changes:
  • list of the changes

---

🧐 Checklist for the PR Reviewers

• The code aligns with the requirements described in the linked JIRA or GitHub issue.
• The PR description clearly documents the changes made and explains any technical trade-offs or design decisions.
• There are no undocumented trade-offs, technical debt, or maintainability issues.
• The PR has been tested thoroughly, and any potential edge cases have been considered and handled.
• Any new dependencies have been justified and documented.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
device-sdk-ts-sample	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	💬 Add feedback	Jan 24, 2025 5:09pm

1 Skipped Deployment

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
doc-device-management-kit	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)	Visit Preview		Jan 24, 2025 5:09pm

[github-actions]

	Messages
✅	Danger: All checks passed successfully! 🎉

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against b839078

[smartine-ledger]

I don't see an update of the current WebHidDeviceConnection.

In addition : Open Close Principle Violation. You can instead decorate WebHidDeviceConnection by adding a new implementation instead of modifying the class. ⬇️

class TimeSinceDeviceConnection implements DeviceConnection {
  private delegate: DeviceConnection;
  constructor(
    deviceConnection
  ){
      delegate = deviceConnection
  }
  ...
}

Pros :

• This way we can add this feature for any DeviceConnection in the future if we want to
• Avoid breaking the current unit test of WebHidDeviceConnection.

[smartine-ledger]

Sorry. I read your code too fast. My bad. Forget about the OCP violation but why does the UT have not been updated?

[valpinkman]

Sorry. I read your code too fast. My bad. Forget about the OCP violation but why does the UT have not been updated?

@smartine-ledger I should have left the PR as draft for now. I'm testing the solution on LLD to make sure it works then I will fix all the tests and finish the PR