Ignore path_set when equality testing LayerSet

[madig]

Found this while testing for equality when loading a layer set vs. recreating it manually.

[github-actions]

🗜 Bloat check ⚖️

Comparing cf645da against b2fb04a

target	old size	new size	difference
target/release/examples/load_save	1.84 MB	1.86 MB	17.77 KB (0.94%)
target/debug/examples/load_save	8.53 MB	8.52 MB	-10.46 KB (-0.12%)

[madig]

Colin says:

a custom PartialEq impl that ignores pathset would be reasonable"

but I don't know whether this will have observable differences in behavior in some edge cases... Need to check the code.

[cmyr]

SO

Colin says:

a custom PartialEq impl that ignores pathset would be reasonable"

but I don't know whether this will have observable differences in behavior in some edge cases... Need to check the code.

So regardless of current behaviour, this comes down to us needing to decide what 'equality' means, in the context of a layer. If a layer is contains exactly the same glyphs as another layer, but has a different path, is it a different layer? (probably yes?)

In any case: to my eye, path_set is an implementation detail, and doesn't seem important to determining equality. All that should matter is equality of name, path, info, and the glyph set? Let me know if you see things differently :)

[cmyr]

I'm curious about some of the stuff in here which seems maybe stale? but over all the fix makes sense!

[madig]

What seems stale to you?