-
-
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
1f9acc7
to
3bf0f10
Compare
fb71bbb
to
f39603b
Compare
3bf0f10
to
7a302ad
Compare
f39603b
to
fb29350
Compare
7a302ad
to
c660603
Compare
fb29350
to
458e968
Compare
c660603
to
79fa813
Compare
458e968
to
1d3eee8
Compare
79fa813
to
d2f3975
Compare
e286a75
to
9142ab8
Compare
d2f3975
to
d20434c
Compare
9142ab8
to
791e29c
Compare
d20434c
to
d42909a
Compare
791e29c
to
c32b52c
Compare
d42909a
to
9d293a1
Compare
c32b52c
to
ac57787
Compare
9d293a1
to
30dd897
Compare
ac57787
to
6a4b37c
Compare
30dd897
to
9d65dc9
Compare
6a4b37c
to
e1c02e0
Compare
Fixes #1629