[Merged by Bors] - Add try_* to add_slot_edge, add_node_edge#6720
Closed
torsteingrindvik wants to merge 3 commits intobevyengine:mainfrom
Closed
[Merged by Bors] - Add try_* to add_slot_edge, add_node_edge#6720torsteingrindvik wants to merge 3 commits intobevyengine:mainfrom
torsteingrindvik wants to merge 3 commits intobevyengine:mainfrom
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Torstein Grindvik <torstein.grindvik@nordicsemi.no>
alice-i-cecile
added
A-Rendering
Member
alice-i-cecile
left a comment
alice-i-cecile
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On board with this direction: I like this as an API pattern a lot.
I'm noticing the same pattern node_id().unwrap() while reviewing. Should we change that too? Should it be in the same PR?
IceSentry
approved these changes
Nov 21, 2022
Contributor
IceSentry
left a comment
IceSentry
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh wow, such a simple change but it makes the render graph a lot nicer!
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
alice-i-cecile
approved these changes
Nov 21, 2022
alice-i-cecile
added
the
S-Ready-For-Final-Review
Contributor
Author
|
@alice-i-cecile About I saw in rustlang that there is precedence for having a So should I make the change for |
Member
|
I would use |
Contributor
Author
|
I'll use that then, it's unsurprising which is good. I was a bit thrown off by this: https://rust-lang.github.io/api-guidelines/naming.html#getter-names-follow-rust-convention-c-getter But I'm not sure what the justification is there and anyway I see Bevy uses a lot of I'll update the description. |
Contributor
|
Yeah, it's pretty much a bevy convention that when you want a fallible getter you add the |
Signed-off-by: Torstein Grindvik <torstein.grindvik@nordicsemi.no>
Member
|
bors r+ |
Contributor
Author
|
Ok, that's good to know. Hopefully CI passes, there was a strange error last run. |
bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 21, 2022
# Objective `add_node_edge` and `add_slot_edge` are fallible methods, but are always used with `.unwrap()`. `input_node` is often unwrapped as well. This points to having an infallible behaviour as default, with an alternative fallible variant if needed. Improves readability and ergonomics. ## Solution - Change `add_node_edge` and `add_slot_edge` to panic on error. - Change `input_node` to panic on `None`. - Add `try_add_node_edge` and `try_add_slot_edge` in case fallible methods are needed. - Add `get_input_node` to still be able to get an `Option`. --- ## Changelog ### Added - `try_add_node_edge` - `try_add_slot_edge` - `get_input_node` ### Changed - `add_node_edge` is now infallible (panics on error) - `add_slot_edge` is now infallible (panics on error) - `input_node` now panics on `None` ## Migration Guide Remove `.unwrap()` from `add_node_edge` and `add_slot_edge`. For cases where the error was handled, use `try_add_node_edge` and `try_add_slot_edge` instead. Remove `.unwrap()` from `input_node`. For cases where the option was handled, use `get_input_node` instead. Co-authored-by: Torstein Grindvik <52322338+torsteingrindvik@users.noreply.github.com>
Contributor
|
Pull request successfully merged into main. Build succeeded:
|
bors
bot
changed the title
taiyoungjang
pushed a commit
to taiyoungjang/bevy
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 15, 2022
# Objective `add_node_edge` and `add_slot_edge` are fallible methods, but are always used with `.unwrap()`. `input_node` is often unwrapped as well. This points to having an infallible behaviour as default, with an alternative fallible variant if needed. Improves readability and ergonomics. ## Solution - Change `add_node_edge` and `add_slot_edge` to panic on error. - Change `input_node` to panic on `None`. - Add `try_add_node_edge` and `try_add_slot_edge` in case fallible methods are needed. - Add `get_input_node` to still be able to get an `Option`. --- ## Changelog ### Added - `try_add_node_edge` - `try_add_slot_edge` - `get_input_node` ### Changed - `add_node_edge` is now infallible (panics on error) - `add_slot_edge` is now infallible (panics on error) - `input_node` now panics on `None` ## Migration Guide Remove `.unwrap()` from `add_node_edge` and `add_slot_edge`. For cases where the error was handled, use `try_add_node_edge` and `try_add_slot_edge` instead. Remove `.unwrap()` from `input_node`. For cases where the option was handled, use `get_input_node` instead. Co-authored-by: Torstein Grindvik <52322338+torsteingrindvik@users.noreply.github.com>
alradish
pushed a commit
to alradish/bevy
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 22, 2023
# Objective `add_node_edge` and `add_slot_edge` are fallible methods, but are always used with `.unwrap()`. `input_node` is often unwrapped as well. This points to having an infallible behaviour as default, with an alternative fallible variant if needed. Improves readability and ergonomics. ## Solution - Change `add_node_edge` and `add_slot_edge` to panic on error. - Change `input_node` to panic on `None`. - Add `try_add_node_edge` and `try_add_slot_edge` in case fallible methods are needed. - Add `get_input_node` to still be able to get an `Option`. --- ## Changelog ### Added - `try_add_node_edge` - `try_add_slot_edge` - `get_input_node` ### Changed - `add_node_edge` is now infallible (panics on error) - `add_slot_edge` is now infallible (panics on error) - `input_node` now panics on `None` ## Migration Guide Remove `.unwrap()` from `add_node_edge` and `add_slot_edge`. For cases where the error was handled, use `try_add_node_edge` and `try_add_slot_edge` instead. Remove `.unwrap()` from `input_node`. For cases where the option was handled, use `get_input_node` instead. Co-authored-by: Torstein Grindvik <52322338+torsteingrindvik@users.noreply.github.com>
ItsDoot
pushed a commit
to ItsDoot/bevy
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 1, 2023
# Objective `add_node_edge` and `add_slot_edge` are fallible methods, but are always used with `.unwrap()`. `input_node` is often unwrapped as well. This points to having an infallible behaviour as default, with an alternative fallible variant if needed. Improves readability and ergonomics. ## Solution - Change `add_node_edge` and `add_slot_edge` to panic on error. - Change `input_node` to panic on `None`. - Add `try_add_node_edge` and `try_add_slot_edge` in case fallible methods are needed. - Add `get_input_node` to still be able to get an `Option`. --- ## Changelog ### Added - `try_add_node_edge` - `try_add_slot_edge` - `get_input_node` ### Changed - `add_node_edge` is now infallible (panics on error) - `add_slot_edge` is now infallible (panics on error) - `input_node` now panics on `None` ## Migration Guide Remove `.unwrap()` from `add_node_edge` and `add_slot_edge`. For cases where the error was handled, use `try_add_node_edge` and `try_add_slot_edge` instead. Remove `.unwrap()` from `input_node`. For cases where the option was handled, use `get_input_node` instead. Co-authored-by: Torstein Grindvik <52322338+torsteingrindvik@users.noreply.github.com>
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
Objective
add_node_edgeandadd_slot_edgeare fallible methods, but are always used with.unwrap().input_nodeis often unwrapped as well.This points to having an infallible behaviour as default, with an alternative fallible variant if needed.
Improves readability and ergonomics.
Solution
add_node_edgeandadd_slot_edgeto panic on error.input_nodeto panic onNone.try_add_node_edgeandtry_add_slot_edgein case fallible methods are needed.get_input_nodeto still be able to get anOption.Changelog
Added
try_add_node_edgetry_add_slot_edgeget_input_nodeChanged
add_node_edgeis now infallible (panics on error)add_slot_edgeis now infallible (panics on error)input_nodenow panics onNoneMigration Guide
Remove
.unwrap()fromadd_node_edgeandadd_slot_edge.For cases where the error was handled, use
try_add_node_edgeandtry_add_slot_edgeinstead.Remove
.unwrap()frominput_node.For cases where the option was handled, use
get_input_nodeinstead.