Remove SerializeOctets bounds
#344
Draft
Conversation
This file contains 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
In its current version, this needs to be paired with a new function in
octseq: NLnetLabs/octseq#57.This makes the bounds more clear. It's a breaking change in a few places where only
SerializeOctetswas specified and notAsRef<[u8]>, altough everything that implementsSerializeOctetsalready implementsAsRef<[u8]>, becauseAsRef<[u8]>is a supertrait ofOctets, so fixing the bounds is easy.I also think that this conceptually simplifies the serialization: we only need to look at the octets to serialize them, that functionality does not need to differ between the types.
Marking as draft because we should first land the other PR in
octseq.