You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
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
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Long story short:
This function is originally meant to check that a type implements ImplicitClone and as an example of a function located on the host library that would clone references implicitly.
But in #42 I wanted to improve the testing to make sure the primitives types we implement ImplicitClone on are actually Copy so I added Copy. It kinda looked weird at that point because it makes less sense as an example. So right now I'm deciding if I should move the example to the general documentation as actual example and make the tests less documentation friendly.
I'm curious to hear your opinion on this @SylvKT, furry friend. Now that you've joined the conversation, can you share your thoughts on this discussion here: #42 (comment)?
ddb351c
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.
why in the world were you cloning this
ddb351c
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.
Long story short:
This function is originally meant to check that a type implements ImplicitClone and as an example of a function located on the host library that would clone references implicitly.
But in #42 I wanted to improve the testing to make sure the primitives types we implement ImplicitClone on are actually Copy so I added Copy. It kinda looked weird at that point because it makes less sense as an example. So right now I'm deciding if I should move the example to the general documentation as actual example and make the tests less documentation friendly.
I'm curious to hear your opinion on this @SylvKT, furry friend. Now that you've joined the conversation, can you share your thoughts on this discussion here: #42 (comment)?
cc @kirillsemyonkin