At the moment FilteringHierarchyDefinition implements HierarchyDefinition, which is a public type and, because of that, we don't want it to expose rxjs types. As a result, FilteringHierarchyDefinition has to convert all rxjs stuff to promises, which make it less efficient.
Maybe we could do this:
create an rxjs-aware hierarchy definition,
make imodel hierarchy provider use the rxjs one,
have an internal wrapper to map public hierarchy definition into the rxjs one,
change FilteringHierarchyDefinition to implement rxjs definition rather than the public one.
Need to see if that helps performance / code cleanliness / something else.
At the moment
FilteringHierarchyDefinitionimplementsHierarchyDefinition, which is a public type and, because of that, we don't want it to exposerxjstypes. As a result,FilteringHierarchyDefinitionhas to convert allrxjsstuff to promises, which make it less efficient.Maybe we could do this:
rxjs-aware hierarchy definition,rxjsone,rxjsone,FilteringHierarchyDefinitionto implementrxjsdefinition rather than the public one.Need to see if that helps performance / code cleanliness / something else.