-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 136
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
Convert between int and bytes #189 #224
Convert between int and bytes #189 #224
Conversation
86709c0
to
60482c1
Compare
Hm, i get the rest of the builds green, but no idea how to make doctests not to break with 1.8, because |
99ea5e8
to
56b1d2f
Compare
Ok i got all doctests to pass here ( sample run ) although dealing with 1.8 is very clunky. |
Ping - any chance of unblocking the workflows ? |
Is this crate simply abandoned? |
(It's not: see #189 (comment)) |
Ping for @hauleth, perhaps you'd be able to unblock the CI checks ? |
56b1d2f
to
2b6bcbe
Compare
Rebased on master again - checks are green. |
Is there any interest still in landing this ? I can rebase/reintegrate if yes. Would be really nice to get at least checks ran |
Yeah, sorry, go ahead and rebase and I'll review it. Note, the |
2b6bcbe
to
7265426
Compare
Rebased, had to end up squashing. So to/from_le_bytes for integer types unfortunately only exists since 1.32 and floats from 1.40, so that doesn't actually clean up the implementation. to/from_bits don't seem to directly help as it can convert u32->f32 but not a [u8;1] to f32 |
You already have a decent fallback for integers, so what I meant was that the float fallback can be something like (And if you peek into the standard library, that's basically how the native float methods are implemented!) |
Thanks - yes that worked better. Please have another look. |
Periodic ping for this PR. Would be really nice if the workflows could be allowed run. |
Hmm, I don't see the workflow button, but let me try pushing a rebase... |
5c0f252
to
b156801
Compare
The implementation looks good. I'm now thinking more about the API design, and maybe we should split it up, like:
The main reason to split What do you think? |
Thanks for taking a look and sorry for long response. Yes, splitting it up looks like a good idea, pushed the change with last commit here. Unsure if Please have another look ( workflows pass ). |
I would also find this useful! |
6640a9a
to
c696ef9
Compare
After trying this with (I also changed a few other things in the implementation, not affecting API.) |
Those all look like great additions and clean-ups to me, API is much better. Thanks for those. Is there anything else that needs to be done before merging ? |
I've been using this feature ( through manual commit hash in If there's any testing, etc. I can help with, let me know. |
Co-authored-by: Flier Lu <flier.lu@gmail.com>
c696ef9
to
bbeeaa2
Compare
bors r+ |
Build succeeded! The publicly hosted instance of bors-ng is deprecated and will go away soon. If you want to self-host your own instance, instructions are here. If you want to switch to GitHub's built-in merge queue, visit their help page. |
Sorry again for the very long delays, but this is now published in 0.2.16! |
Thank you !!! Great to see persistence paid off 👍 |
Picking up #103 from @flier to rebase and factor in feedback. Making a quick draft first