-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
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
Add Unboxed variant #4
Comments
I've been talking about this with @cartazio. I think next up will be The library's at a good state where we can get all the |
I agree, that there's little benefit of having |
you can get all three via having a |
I cannot parse the previous comment. I also would think very hard whether having |
That's definitely a possiblity. I'll write it out and see if there are any edge cases we have to worry about. |
I agree that maybe the instance Would have footguns. But it would reduce the engineering surface area for all the exposed methods |
My one worry would be that it would introduce upstream variability which could break downstream invariants. It's probably not the case since the |
I’m mostly saying at some level you want / need it internally. |
Speaking as upstream: what are possible upstream variations that are physically possible? And not otherwise already possible with any approach you do for your layer? |
I don't know! I don't know the |
Let’s find an hour to sit down with some tea and it’ll be done by the end. It’s really much simpler than you expect I think ;) |
Other variants (storable, primitive) would be nice bonus, but Unbox’d vector is often a must thing
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: