Replies: 1 comment
-
|
This impl would conflict with all of the existing impls for extractors that implement |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
State passed to
Router::with_state()must implementClone, correct? Because of this, wouldn't it be possible to have a blanket implementation forFromRequestParts<S> for S, and get rid of theStateextractor altogether?I would think
Statedoes the same thing anyway, although I can't find an actual implementation forFromRequestParts, except for this blanket impl.In my own application I can implement
FromRequestParts<MyState> for MyStatesuccessfully, but I don't know if another blanket impl would conflict with the existing one.Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions