-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 72
Add optional shape enums in sdk #870
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from 8 commits
84fe641
94d6220
e1fc7a2
88a9619
77f56e1
9752020
3603d24
cd4da85
72426ea
3fb3be5
2129942
a5b2fa6
68d1522
c7ecb4a
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
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.
@eloff @ericmlujan could you folks review this part? I'm not familiar with this code at all and @gasmith is out -- I do wonder if there's a way we could combine this with the non-optional macro rather than having two whole macros for it? but not sure how feasible that suggestion is
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'm certainly not confident enough in Rust macros to combine them nicely, especially for SDK level code. This was done because it was easier for me to understand and easier for me to read.
Super happy to change this if someone better at rust has some ideas.