Use repr(transparent) for wrapper structs #32
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
`repr(transparent)` provides stronger guarantees that the struct will have the exact same representation as its only field. And `Context` didn't even *have* an explicit representation, not even `repr(C)`!! Because of all the transmutation that this library does between wrapper types and the types that they wrap, those guarantees are quite important, don't you think? :)
|
Upon closer inspection it does look like Context does not need |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
repr(transparent)provides stronger guarantees that the struct will have the exact same representation as its only field. AndContextdidn't even have an explicit representation, not evenrepr(C)!!Because of all the transmutation that this library does between wrapper types and the types that they wrap, those guarantees are quite important, don't you think? :)