Implement << and <<= for all uints
#1723
Conversation
| impl IntImpl<'_> for Uint64 {} | ||
| impl IntImpl<'_> for Uint128 {} | ||
| impl IntImpl<'_> for Uint256 {} | ||
| impl IntImpl<'_> for Uint512 {} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we remove impl AllImpl<'_> for Uint512 {} and friends now? They should be required implicitly through the supertrait.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Only if we copy all the bounds from AllImpl to IntImpl. The way it is right now, IntImpl requires that they have AllImpl too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm referring to line 67-70 in the new code. There we implement
impl AllImpl<'_> for Uint64 {}
impl AllImpl<'_> for Uint128 {}
impl AllImpl<'_> for Uint256 {}
impl AllImpl<'_> for Uint512 {}
which requires the Uint* types to implement the AllImpl traits. However, line 71-74 should imply that.
E.g. impl IntImpl<'_> for Uint64 {} failes to compile if Uint64 misses Add<&'a Self> since IntImpl requires AllImpl which requires Add<&'a Self>.
Or am I missing something here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know what you mean, but that's not how it works. Let's use Uint64 as an example: Line 71 implies that it implements AllImpl and all the Sh* traits. If we remove line 67, then it does not implement AllImpl anymore and line 71 will fail to compile. AllImpl does not get automatically implemented just because all the bounds are implemented.
Co-authored-by: Simon Warta <2603011+webmaster128@users.noreply.github.com>
|
Ah, some CHANGELOG entry would be nice |
closes #1712