We call inner.enter before we call layer.on_enter, so it feels wrong to then call inner.exit before we call layer.on_exit. Either the inner's view of the span wraps the outer's view of the span, or the other way around.
Motivation
The current behavior feels wrong. I haven't actually run into anything breaking because of this, but while reading through it code having the same ordering in enter and exit (as opposed to inverted ordering on exit) just seemed odd.
Worth noting that this could probably also be changed on 0.1.x, but I figured I'd try master first since it's presumably breaking in other ways too, so it'd matter less here if it did change behavior.
We call
inner.enter
before we calllayer.on_enter
, so it feels wrong to then callinner.exit
before we calllayer.on_exit
. Either the inner's view of the span wraps the outer's view of the span, or the other way around.Motivation
The current behavior feels wrong. I haven't actually run into anything breaking because of this, but while reading through it code having the same ordering in enter and exit (as opposed to inverted ordering on exit) just seemed odd.