On 2024.08.08 01:33, brian m. carlson wrote: > On 2024-08-07 at 22:03:53, brian m. carlson wrote: > > I left some comments in the series. I think this is a nice first step > > as a proof of concept, and I'm very pleased to see it. > > I noticed a couple of other things. First, the code has not been run > through rustfmt. I think it would be helpful for us to do that since it > makes it easier to not argue about style and it can be easily enforced > in CI. It will also reduce diff noise, which I expect Junio will > appreciate. > > Second, cargo clippy complains about some of the code. It's again > helpful if we can fix those warnings or, if they're not appropriate, to > disable them with an appropriate `allow` pragma. (In this case, I think > they're both spot on, but I have seen some cases where I've disabled a > warning.) This is something we may also want to test in CI in the > future, and downstream users of our crate will appreciate not getting > warnings when using clippy themselves, so we should be kind to them. > > I noticed these because my editor complains about the latter and I have > now intuited enough of rustfmt's output that I can tell sometimes when > things aren't formatted with it. > > For those members of the list who are less familiar with Rust, rustfmt > is the standard code formatter (and formatting verifier) and clippy is a > lint tool recommending best practices. Both are shipped with Rust and > using both is customary for Rust projects. > -- > brian m. carlson (they/them or he/him) > Toronto, Ontario, CA Applied Clippy and rustfmt fixes throughout V2, thanks for the catch.
