Package object disinheritance for scala-xml #4380
Merged
Conversation
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
rossabaker
force-pushed
the
package-object-disinheritance
branch
from
eff8cb7 to
c08f67b
Compare
ChristopherDavenport
approved these changes
Feb 10, 2021
rossabaker
changed the title
rossabaker
added a commit
to http4s/http4s-servlet
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 3, 2022
…disinheritance Package object disinheritance for scala-xml
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Inheriting from package objects is on the way out in Scala 3, after being briefly deprecated in Scala 2.13. It also causes problems with sbt's incremental compiler.
It's extensible as a codec project grows, and Cats users should feel at home. It also feels quite overengineered.
The net effect is former importers of
would now need to do:
or
or
The choice is bad and the verbosity is bad and the boilerplate in the code is bad but the futureproofing is good and the consistency with upstream is good.
Discuss.