Skip to content

Conversation

@bugadani
Copy link
Owner

@bugadani bugadani commented Apr 28, 2020

A different approach to the relaxed collection. Instead of providing a key and an index interface that does the same, separate the two based on type. This builds on the idea that having the relaxed makes the key-based access redundant, and thus it does not provide those methods.

There's a slight problem with having an object id in relaxed mode, otherwise this is probably the least redundant way to provide a relaxed collection.

  • Tests

@bugadani bugadani changed the title Different implementations based on type Different access modes based on type Apr 28, 2020
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Apr 28, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #10 into master will increase coverage by 1.71%.
The diff coverage is 73.23%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #10      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   64.46%   66.18%   +1.71%     
==========================================
  Files           2        2              
  Lines         197      207      +10     
  Branches       28       31       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits          127      137      +10     
+ Misses         32       28       -4     
- Partials       38       42       +4     
Flag Coverage Δ
#unittests 66.18% <73.23%> (+1.71%) ⬆️
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/lib.rs 60.86% <70.58%> (+3.98%) ⬆️
tests/test.rs 72.82% <80.00%> (-1.04%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 0bbad2e...2bcc0dc. Read the comment docs.

@chrysn chrysn mentioned this pull request Apr 29, 2020
@bugadani
Copy link
Owner Author

Superseded by #17

@bugadani bugadani closed this May 21, 2020
@bugadani bugadani deleted the feature/relaxed-interface branch May 21, 2020 13:13
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.

3 participants