Replace derive_more derives with manual implementations #123
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
|
yes wrapping the impls into a macro_rules that takes the identifier of the struct could avoid code duplication. however for two implementations the advantage is negligible. Can you also get the latest updates ? |
Replaces an explicit line break that auto-format removed.
svix-jplatte
force-pushed
the
rm-derive_more
branch
from
1ac9048 to
4dd104c
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Do you want me to try
macro_rules!"derives" as an alternative? I think due to all the types here being generic, that would probably only save a few lines and the macro code would be a tad hard to read, so I'd personally prefer this for readability. It's not that much boilerplate IMHO.Resolves #122.