Feat/conv package: refactored conversions with generics #108
Conversation
Also: * refactored all the conversion and pointer/value methods as a separate package, thus deprecating their usage from the swag package. NOTE: * This is a first step towards the complete split of the vast API of the swag package into smaller packages, which will eventually become go modules, thus reducing the spread of dependencies (e.g. easyjson and yaml). Signed-off-by: Frederic BIDON <fredbi@yahoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Frederic BIDON <fredbi@yahoo.com>
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #108 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 89.03% 87.54% -1.50%
==========================================
Files 15 19 +4
Lines 1970 1678 -292
==========================================
- Hits 1754 1469 -285
+ Misses 183 176 -7
Partials 33 33
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Code suggestion to simplify test Co-authored-by: ccoVeille <3875889+ccoVeille@users.noreply.github.com>
|
@ccoVeille you may also find this read interesting, as I've tried to explain the (long-winded) migration plan that all these PRs try to contribute to: #68 |
Signed-off-by: Frederic BIDON <fredbi@yahoo.com>
| // NOTE: [unsafe.SizeOf] simply returns the size in bytes of the value. | ||
| // For primitive types T, the generic stencil is precompiled and this value | ||
| // is resolved at compile time, resulting in an immediate call to [strconv.ParseFloat]. | ||
| var v T | ||
| f, err := strconv.ParseFloat(str, int(unsafe.Sizeof(v))*8) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is good, but you are using unsafe.Sizeof in various place here in this file
Please consider:
- creating a sizeof.go file
- add a sizeOfNumber func
- add this exact comment
- call sizeOfNumber everywhere else
This way, only sizeof.go will import the unsafe package and it would be clearer
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you see this before merging ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ok thanks. I'v been considering that wrapper func too. Perhaps in a follow-up. Now it is time to merge and move on to the next series of packages
There was a problem hiding this comment.
|
again a false negative from codecov: reducing the code automatically magnifies the few uncovered (pre-existing) parts of the code |
2 participants
feat: add generics for conversion and pointer utilities