feat(codegen) skip_deserializing #265
Merged
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
|
@erickt I see that you have been busy for the past 2 weeks but let me know if there is anything I can do to move forward any of my PRs. |
|
@dtolnay: yeah I've been busy with work, but my head is popping up and I'm trying to catch up with my queue. I'll get to this today or tomorrow! |
|
I have rebased to fix the conflict with #275. |
|
I have rebased to fix the conflict with #281. |
|
@dtolnay: thanks for this as well! I merged it in. Have you begun work on getting this to work with |
|
No. I will work on it later this week, along with the equivalent of #260 so that fields we don't deserialize do not need to implement Deserialize. |
|
Thanks @dtolnay! You're the best. |
This was referenced Apr 13, 2016
Closed
Closed
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Addresses part of #197.
This will be more exciting when I add logic to omit the
T: Deserializebound for fields that haveskip_deserializing, like what #260 does forskip_serializing, but I am waiting for a code review on #260 before implementing that.