-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 186
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
impl PartialEq and PartialOrd with primitives #136
Merged
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
bors r+ |
Build succeeded |
🎉 |
cuviper
added a commit
to cuviper/num-bigint
that referenced
this pull request
May 9, 2020
This manually reverts the new implementations from pull request rust-num#136. As noted in issue rust-num#150, the mere existence of those impls can have a bad effect on type inference in other parts of a crate, even from afar. All comparisons of primitives with an unknown type become ambiguous whether that's meant to compare with itself or a bigint, even if `num-bigint` is not directly in scope at all. Since this can break unrelated code in surprising ways, I think it's not wise for us to have these implementations. Maybe we can explore other methods to compare with primitives in the future, though it won't be as convenient as using the operators.
bors bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 1, 2020
151: Revert PartialEq and PartialOrd with primitives r=cuviper a=cuviper This manually reverts the new implementations from pull request #136. As noted in issue #150, the mere existence of those impls can have a bad effect on type inference in other parts of a crate, even from afar. All comparisons of primitives with an unknown type become ambiguous whether that's meant to compare with itself or a bigint, even if `num-bigint` is not directly in scope at all. Since this can break unrelated code in surprising ways, I think it's not wise for us to have these implementations. Maybe we can explore other methods to compare with primitives in the future, though it won't be as convenient as using the operators. Co-authored-by: Josh Stone <cuviper@gmail.com>
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.
This rebases and extends #105 (cc @hansihe). As noted before, it may hurt type inference where callers use comparison operators that relied on only one possible
impl
before. We're on the way to 0.3 though, so even a relatively minor break like that is perfectly allowable.