Fix nested generics in Reflect derive #10791
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
MrGVSV
added
C-Bug
alice-i-cecile
approved these changes
Nov 29, 2023
cart
approved these changes
Nov 29, 2023
cart
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 30, 2023
# Objective > Issue raised on [Discord](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/1002362493634629796/1179182488787103776) Currently the following code fails due to a missing `TypePath` bound: ```rust #[derive(Reflect)] struct Foo<T>(T); #[derive(Reflect)] struct Bar<T>(Foo<T>); #[derive(Reflect)] struct Baz<T>(Bar<Foo<T>>); ``` ## Solution Add `TypePath` to the per-field bounds instead of _just_ the generic type parameter bounds. ### Related Work It should be noted that #9046 would help make these kinds of issues easier to work around and/or avoid entirely. --- ## Changelog - Fixes missing `TypePath` requirement when deriving `Reflect` on nested generics
james7132
pushed a commit
to james7132/bevy
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 1, 2023
# Objective > Issue raised on [Discord](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/1002362493634629796/1179182488787103776) Currently the following code fails due to a missing `TypePath` bound: ```rust #[derive(Reflect)] struct Foo<T>(T); #[derive(Reflect)] struct Bar<T>(Foo<T>); #[derive(Reflect)] struct Baz<T>(Bar<Foo<T>>); ``` ## Solution Add `TypePath` to the per-field bounds instead of _just_ the generic type parameter bounds. ### Related Work It should be noted that bevyengine#9046 would help make these kinds of issues easier to work around and/or avoid entirely. --- ## Changelog - Fixes missing `TypePath` requirement when deriving `Reflect` on nested generics
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 24, 2023
# Objective - Provides an alternate solution to the one implemented in #10791 without breaking changes. ## Solution - Changes the bounds of macro-generated `TypePath` implementations to universally ignore the types of fields, rather than use the same bounds as other implementations. I think this is a more holistic solution than #10791 because it totally erases the finicky bounds we currently generate, helping to untangle the reflection trait system.
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.
Objective
Currently the following code fails due to a missing
TypePathbound:Solution
Add
TypePathto the per-field bounds instead of just the generic type parameter bounds.Related Work
It should be noted that #9046 would help make these kinds of issues easier to work around and/or avoid entirely.
Changelog
TypePathrequirement when derivingReflecton nested generics