-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
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
feat(abg)!: replace data class perks by code generation in bindings #1644
base: vampire/binding-version-v2
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Warning This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. |
fcb93fe
to
f2e6c05
Compare
6e0c383
to
05942ab
Compare
f2e6c05
to
f9bff8a
Compare
26ff564
to
915be83
Compare
5b756f4
to
a485fe4
Compare
915be83
to
01e7a87
Compare
a485fe4
to
6c58c0d
Compare
01e7a87
to
781eb1b
Compare
6c58c0d
to
66b9afd
Compare
781eb1b
to
248813f
Compare
66b9afd
to
f8e466f
Compare
248813f
to
a5da3b1
Compare
f8e466f
to
eb02b5a
Compare
a5da3b1
to
f58ac6b
Compare
eb02b5a
to
36a0a91
Compare
f58ac6b
to
f11c738
Compare
36a0a91
to
8895541
Compare
f11c738
to
5e87ccb
Compare
8895541
to
4281b5d
Compare
5e87ccb
to
c89a7e1
Compare
- The `equals` method will work like before. | ||
- The `hashCode` method will work like before. | ||
- The `toString` method will work like before. | ||
- Destructuring assignments are not possible anymore as this will likely break silently or during |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I initially wanted to ask why this change is made under v2 of the bindings server, and it's probably because of this remark about destructuring. I think it's enough to provide component1
...componentN
functions, then destructuring should work, and we wouldn't have to bump the route version just yet.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My plan is to revisit our discussion we had on Slack to ensure that there's no simpler option to achieve what we want. Sometimes ideas come after time 😄
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's see if someone has some interesting take on this: https://kotlinlang.slack.com/archives/C8C4JTXR7/p1729233924861659
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's enough to provide component1...componentN functions, then destructuring should work, and we wouldn't have to bump the route version just yet.
It would not be, as said on Slack.
It was intentional I left them out.
And additionally the copy
method now also enforces named-arguments which is also a breaking change.
So to replicate here too, the goal here was not to somehow make it compatible with the upcoming Kotlin versions, but to improve the API to the originally intended way.
That this also fixes the copy visibility thing is merely a by-product and just was the trigger to finally have a look at it.
4281b5d
to
1f9acc7
Compare
c89a7e1
to
fb71bbb
Compare
6a4b37c
to
e1c02e0
Compare
9d65dc9
to
cd64a8e
Compare
e1c02e0
to
f416585
Compare
cd64a8e
to
62d0334
Compare
f416585
to
38ae26e
Compare
62d0334
to
1692740
Compare
38ae26e
to
78478e8
Compare
0d20faa
to
361c817
Compare
2e625de
to
792beb4
Compare
792beb4
to
6edeaac
Compare
29455da
to
5ea294c
Compare
44c7839
to
a157006
Compare
5ea294c
to
56f3508
Compare
a157006
to
ff4ec7a
Compare
56f3508
to
aa3ec98
Compare
ff4ec7a
to
63a6397
Compare
aa3ec98
to
0a56a01
Compare
0a56a01
to
e5b91b1
Compare
63a6397
to
cc802a9
Compare
cc802a9
to
cb23a96
Compare
e5b91b1
to
35fa1c1
Compare
Fixes #1629