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

Consistent composure of backend overrides #79

Open
pinkforest opened this issue Jun 26, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Consistent composure of backend overrides #79

pinkforest opened this issue Jun 26, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@pinkforest
Copy link
Contributor

pinkforest commented Jun 26, 2024

Several crates now support "override" for backend/s - people have different needs from top level binary

Ideally the selection is automatic but the overrides are provided e.g. wasm (both web and non-web) no_std runtimes etc.

I've also asked in several places to further the support:

This would be good given the compiler / cargo now has added features to validate the cfg use.

Typically people used features but as repeated in other issues - copied here;

  • Allows top-level binary composing the primitive as the overarching choice and transients not having any say
  • Transient dependencies don't need to "relay" it down - dalek long time didn't delay the choices down resulting only serial use
  • The compiler has now taken official stance on it to support the pattern
  • Composes as mutually exclusive feature vs features are not mutually exclusive
  • Other issues discussed in the long winded ref'd issue

Especially with rustls ideally it would be target arch but we can't assume crypto primitives take the environemnt into account.

Especially in non-monolithic primitives that do only one thing - it's primitive scope - it's essential to not duplicate the environment handling to every single primitive composed into one package under it.

@pinkforest pinkforest changed the title Consistent composure of backend selections Consistent composure of backend overrides Jun 26, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant