Refactor out common code into a IndexItem::new constructor
#149452
Conversation
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-author
|
@lolbinarycat Felt like doing something semi-mechanical that doesn't require too much concentration, so thought I'd tackle the issue you opened. But TBH, after pulling out the common code into an |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
yotamofek
force-pushed
the
pr/rustdoc/IndexItem-new
branch
2 times, most recently
from
32d0484 to
6cedf2c
Compare
| let desc = short_markdown_summary(&item.doc_value(), &item.link_names(cache)); | ||
| let search_type = get_function_type_for_search(item, tcx, impl_generics, parent_did, cache); | ||
| let aliases = item.attrs.get_doc_aliases(); | ||
| let deprecation = item.deprecation(tcx); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wonder if it makes sense to extract this subset of fields into a separate struct and include is a field on IndexItem?
Then maybe its constructor won't have to handle so many differences in behavior between the two call sites
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
It was working on #149460 that inspired this issue, and I agree that perhaps a substruct would be a better approach. |
yotamofek
force-pushed
the
pr/rustdoc/IndexItem-new
branch
from
6cedf2c to
acd4d7e
Compare
|
What do you think about how it looks now? @lolbinarycat |
|
the amount of times I typed "sub stract" instead of "sub struct"....... 😤 |
4 participants
#149404