Use a problem as the intro for newtype pattern #153
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
A problem can highlight some of the use cases of newtype pattern rather than discussing generally that rust is strongly typed. Make the user understand the need of newtype. I wonder if it should be in the description instead?
pickfire
commented
Jan 3, 2021
simonsan
added
C-enhancement
simonsan
reviewed
Jan 4, 2021
simonsan
reviewed
Jan 4, 2021
Co-authored-by: simonsan <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ivan Tham <[email protected]>
simonsan
previously approved these changes
Jan 4, 2021
simonsan
reviewed
Jan 5, 2021
simonsan
approved these changes
Jan 5, 2021
|
Nice, thank you! :-) |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
A problem can highlight some of the use cases of newtype
pattern rather than discussing generally that rust is strongly
typed. Make the user understand the need of newtype.
I wonder if it should be in the description instead?
Continued #117
r? @simonsan