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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Spring cleaning for tower::balance #449
Spring cleaning for tower::balance #449
Changes from all commits
7b709d9
fdbb4bb
516a0e1
8ede3c5
c1af02a
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
probably best saved for a follow-up PR, but should
Discover
just have anUnpin
bound on it? Since the unpin bound is only on theService
impl forBalance
, this will currently fail very late, when a user tries to wrap aBalance
in another layer or actually call aBalance
, and it probably won't be super clear whyService
isn't implemented. IfDiscover
requiredSelf: Unpin
, the compiler error would occur when the user writes a badDiscover
impl, which would be much clearer.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we should avoid
Unpin
bounds wherever possible. They are really sad, especially when we one day get generators that implementStream
. This also ties into the larger discussion in #319.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, but if
Discover
is going to be polled inpoll_ready
, it will always have to beUnpin
unlesspoll_ready
is changed to take aPin<&mut Self>
receiver. In that case, we would be making a breaking change anyway and could remove anUnpin
bound fromDiscover
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't know if
Discover
will only ever be polled inpoll_ready
though? But you're right that ifpoll_ready
later changes to bePin
, we could remove the bound then (although I think removing the bound is backwards-compatible anyway?).