Skip to content
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

Remove macros from some trait implementation #265

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 7, 2020

Conversation

atomicky
Copy link
Contributor

This clarify relationship of traits (see #264 ).

Copy link
Member

@9prady9 9prady9 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you please rebase it without the merge commit. Your HEAD for checkout of new branch to add changes should be upstream(arrayfire/arrayfire) master branch - the same branch against which the PR is made.

I was playing with trait bound on associated types locally, haven't pushed to my fork yet. Seems like the CI job ran fine with such bounds.

Also, please squash the commits that are adding HasAfEnum trait bound to associated type into a single commit as they all are essentially doing same type of change - Adding HasAfEnum trait bound to associated types

@atomicky
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sorry, I'm not used to sending PR. I did rebase, squash and made another branch:
https://github.com/atomicky/arrayfire-rust/tree/improve-trait-definition

What should I do now? Sending another PR, or can I overwrite current PR?

- Simplify `Convertable` trait definition
- Force `ImplicitPromote::Output` to be `HasAfEnum`. This is aimed at improving usability
  for generic code.
- Simplify `ConstGenerator` trait definition
@9prady9 9prady9 force-pushed the improve-trait-definition branch from 262afad to ff6a0f2 Compare December 1, 2020 05:43
@9prady9
Copy link
Member

9prady9 commented Dec 1, 2020

Sorry, I'm not used to sending PR. I did rebase, squash and made another branch:
https://github.com/atomicky/arrayfire-rust/tree/improve-trait-definition

What should I do now? Sending another PR, or can I overwrite current PR?

I took care of it. No need to create another PR. I want to make changes only if needed to yours after some local testing. Hope that is okay by you.

@9prady9 9prady9 force-pushed the improve-trait-definition branch from ff6a0f2 to ddbc2d3 Compare December 1, 2020 06:24
@9prady9 9prady9 force-pushed the improve-trait-definition branch from ddbc2d3 to 545f16d Compare December 1, 2020 06:31
@atomicky
Copy link
Contributor Author

atomicky commented Dec 1, 2020

Thanks for your kind help!

@9prady9
Copy link
Member

9prady9 commented Dec 7, 2020

I believe more improvements are needed to further improve generic function programming. I am working on it right now. Hopefully, the bounds specification will simplify down further.

This PR is good by itself. @atomicky Thank you for the contribution.

@9prady9 9prady9 merged commit bdae731 into arrayfire:master Dec 7, 2020
@atomicky atomicky deleted the improve-trait-definition branch December 12, 2020 12:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants