Iterating over Ini yields "Section" type instead of "SectionIter" (2.0 - breaking change) #42
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
dralley
commented
Aug 12, 2021
|
Hi @dralley. |
dralley
commented
Aug 18, 2021
| fn into_iter(self) -> Self::IntoIter { | ||
| IntoIter { base: self.base, keys_iterator: self.keys.into_iter() } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The compiler complained about conflicting implementations
|
I figured as much, I can fix it without much trouble. |
FreeCX
reviewed
Aug 22, 2021
|
The general principle is fine though, yes? |
|
I think so, if we keep the parsing capabilities of |
dralley
force-pushed
the
master
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d6360f7
to
cbf88f3
Compare
|
@FreeCX Apart from missing documentation and maybe some additional tests / cleanup, how does this look |
I think pretty good |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
From the previous discussion here: #35
I have no expectations about this being merged quickly or anything since it's a change for 2.0, I just wanted to put this out early for review at your leisure.
I expect that the API still needs some improvement and I might have missed some things in the docs. I'll come back to it eventually.