Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Specifing a custom N should not remove the defaults but impl it for N in addition to defaults #4

Closed
Boscop opened this issue Oct 2, 2019 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@Boscop
Copy link

Boscop commented Oct 2, 2019

Specifing a custom N should not remove the defaults but impl it for N in addition to defaults.

E.g. when I do big_array! { BigArray; 823, }, it won't work for all my other arrays that have sizes that are supported by big_array! { BigArray; }
I know I can define both, with different names, but I'd prefer to have the same name, because I have a lot of non-standard sizes and I think the goal of this crate is to make it as seamless as for Vecs.

@est31 est31 added the enhancement New feature or request label Oct 2, 2019
@est31
Copy link
Owner

est31 commented Oct 2, 2019

I think I made the array override the entire list so that people have full flexibility. Also to allow expansion of the builtin list in the future without breaking changes. But as I haven't expanded the list I suppose we can add such a feature.

To avoid breaking changes we shouldn't override the default mode but add new syntax. e.g. a plus sign as separator.

@est31 est31 closed this as completed in 64b2529 Oct 2, 2019
@Boscop
Copy link
Author

Boscop commented Oct 3, 2019

Yea, that would be great :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants