Add support for defining schemas. #28
Merged
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
|
I believe this is ready for review and merge, and it supersedes #11, which has grown in size and scope to a point where reviewing it properly does not seem feasible. |
This is another attempt at allowing providers to define schemas. It's born out of the ashes of #11, which gradually grew from baking an apple pie from scratch into creating the universe. Or however that saying goes. This is intentionally limited in scope to just setting up the types for declaring schemas and the types required by that, namely our attribute interfaces. Unlike #11, it makes no attempt to use these types for anything or prove they're the right types; the work done with #11 gives me confidence that they're a worthwhile direction to pursue. I'm submitting this as a separate PR to make review easier and to optimize for mergeability, letting us get some shared types established while still taking an appropriate amount of time to review the reflection code that is in our future.
paddycarver
force-pushed
the
paddy_schema_minimal
branch
from
8332fea
to
10602ce
Compare
paddycarver
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 31, 2021
This adds to #28 by creating implementations of the attr.Type interface for our primitive types: bools, numbers, and strings.
Merged
paddycarver
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 31, 2021
This adds to #28 by creating implementations of the attr.Type interface for our primitive types: bools, numbers, and strings.
paddycarver
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 1, 2021
This adds to #28 by creating implementations of the attr.Type interface for our primitive types: bools, numbers, and strings.
paddycarver
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 1, 2021
This adds to #28 by creating implementations of the attr.Type interface for our primitive types: bools, numbers, and strings.
paddycarver
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 1, 2021
This adds to #28 by creating implementations of the attr.Type interface for our primitive types: bools, numbers, and strings.
|
I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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.
This is another attempt at allowing providers to define schemas. It's
born out of the ashes of #11, which gradually grew from baking an apple
pie from scratch into creating the universe. Or however that saying
goes.
This is intentionally limited in scope to just setting up the types for
declaring schemas and the types required by that, namely our attribute
interfaces. Unlike #11, it makes no attempt to use these types for
anything or prove they're the right types; the work done with #11 gives
me confidence that they're a worthwhile direction to pursue.
I'm submitting this as a separate PR to make review easier and to
optimize for mergeability, letting us get some shared types established
while still taking an appropriate amount of time to review the
reflection code that is in our future.
Fixes #12.