TaggedObject encoding for Nullary constructor does not have "contents" field #307
Conversation
| @@ -201,7 +201,6 @@ instance ( IsRecord a isRecord | |||
| (builder tagFieldName <> | |||
| B.char7 ':' <> | |||
| builder (constructorTagModifier opts (conName (undefined :: t c a p)))) <> | |||
| B.char7 ',' <> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a bit mysterious. Can you explain what's going on here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I see what's going on: you moved the comma insertion elsewhere. Is that correct?
(Ideally, the movement of comma insertion would have been a separate standalone commit, and it would thus have been obvious what was going on.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes indeed, I moved the comma insertion. Otherwise, the encoding for nullary constructor would be {"tag": "X",} (trailing comma). I agree a separate commit would have made this more clear, I'll keep it in mind.
|
Hi @basvandijk I updated my pull request based on your suggestions and it still works as expected. Explicitly specifying the case for nullary constructors is indeed simpler. If you prefer me to amend these two commits to the previous one, tell me. We are all busy, I understand this took a while. |
|
@devwout if you could please squash and rebase your commits, I'd appreciate it. Thank you. |
devwout
force-pushed
the
nullary_constructor_encoding
branch
from
9eec9a9
to
c072f7a
Compare
|
Hi @bos The pull request is rebased and squashed into two commits. I think it is best to commit the tests for existing functionality separately. |
As requested in #300 , implemented this for both GHC Generics and TemplateHaskell .