Skip to content

Conversation

Xiretza
Copy link
Contributor

@Xiretza Xiretza commented Aug 11, 2025

This more closely matches the criteria for e.g. #[repr(transparent)] and #[serde(transparent)].

TODO, if this is deemed a desirable change:

  • Documentation updates
  • Tests (Where should those go? The change isn't backend-specific)

Does your PR solve an issue?

Couldn't find an issue filed already.

Is this a breaking change?

No, code that previously compiled is unchanged, only code that used to be a compile error now does compile.

This more closely matches the criteria for e.g. #[repr(transparent)]
and #[serde(transparent)].
Copy link
Collaborator

@abonander abonander left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks fine with a couple of nits + docs and testing.

Tests (Where should those go? The change isn't backend-specific)

Preferably you should add a test for each backend to be sure the behavior is consistent. But if you don't have the time for that, I'd say just pick one:

@Xiretza Xiretza force-pushed the transparent-named-structs branch 4 times, most recently from c0ae489 to 2eb8165 Compare August 19, 2025 16:18
@Xiretza Xiretza force-pushed the transparent-named-structs branch 5 times, most recently from 53d62c3 to 985d526 Compare August 20, 2025 20:12
@Xiretza Xiretza force-pushed the transparent-named-structs branch from 985d526 to d125276 Compare August 20, 2025 20:17
@Xiretza Xiretza requested a review from abonander August 20, 2025 20:31
@abonander
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks!

@abonander abonander merged commit a301d9a into launchbadge:main Aug 21, 2025
104 checks passed
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants