Migrate to 2021 edition and add examples #71
Conversation
|
We could go right to 2021, I think? |
|
Oh, I was just being conservative because nothing else in georust is 2021 yet |
|
Might be a good place to start, since |
urschrei
force-pushed
the
examples
branch
3 times, most recently
from
67f40e4
to
550ec59
Compare
urschrei
changed the title
|
Well I guess we know it doesn't work. |
|
We need something like: - name: Install Rust toolchain
uses: actions-rs/toolchain@v1
with:
toolchain: stable
profile: minimal
override: true
components: rustfmt, rust-src |
|
nm I did it. |
|
Two last things I'd like to nail down:
|
.github/workflows/test.yml
Outdated
| - run: cargo install cargo-all-features | ||
| - run: cargo build-all-features | ||
| - run: cargo test-all-features | ||
| - run: cargo test |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was it too slow to run all the feature combinations?
I think we should do at least cargo test --all-features and cargo test --no-default-features
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point, although no-default-features will cause our examples to fail…
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think there's a way to declare required features for examples. Testing with --no-default-features still seems desirable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, trying to find the details now instead of putting cfgs everywhere
There was a problem hiding this comment.
https://stackoverflow.com/a/61417700 doesn't look great, though.
src/lib.rs
Outdated
| //! use std::convert::TryInto; | ||
| //! use wkt::Wkt; | ||
| //! use geo_types::Point; | ||
| //! // point's items field contains a wkt::Geometry enum member |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah... items is weird. I guess the idea is that you can express multiple geometries without explicitly putting them into a GeometryCollection?
I tried to track down the corresponding section in the spec, but chickened out after a few minutes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe better to not even mention items in the introductory example, and only show it in the case where there are multiple items? Otherwise is there any reason to even know about items?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess without the geo-types feature, items is the only way to get the geometry =(
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be great to know whether anyone actually uses the multiple geometry functionality in the wild…
|
@urschrei should this be merged? There are two approvals, but no merge, so high chance of bitrot |
|
Oh, yeah. I think I was just leaving it for a few days. |
|
bors r+ |
|
Build succeeded: |
CHANGES.mdif knowledge of this change could be valuable to users.