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
outbound: add request builder #912
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Loong <loong.dai@intel.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is a regression in safety and behavior. It bloats the code and adds indirection via macro, and makes it possible to forget to set fields - less safe than today. The only real benefit is we can omit the None fields, which I view as a downside - being explicit is important here
@daixiang0: The following test failed, say
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
I want to use existed crate to reduce the builder codes, here is an example without any crate:
|
My concern is not with the crate it's with the concept in general |
Sure, if the issue is not planed, feel free to close all. |
ping @hzxuzhonghu as the issue requester. |
PR needs rebase. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
Fix #846
Introduce typed-builder to reduce builder codes and make all struct easy to build.