Revert PartialEq and PartialOrd with primitives #151
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
This manually reverts the new implementations from pull request rust-num#136. As noted in issue rust-num#150, the mere existence of those impls can have a bad effect on type inference in other parts of a crate, even from afar. All comparisons of primitives with an unknown type become ambiguous whether that's meant to compare with itself or a bigint, even if `num-bigint` is not directly in scope at all. Since this can break unrelated code in surprising ways, I think it's not wise for us to have these implementations. Maybe we can explore other methods to compare with primitives in the future, though it won't be as convenient as using the operators.
|
bors r+ |
7 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 manually reverts the new implementations from pull request #136. As
noted in issue #150, the mere existence of those impls can have a bad
effect on type inference in other parts of a crate, even from afar. All
comparisons of primitives with an unknown type become ambiguous whether
that's meant to compare with itself or a bigint, even if
num-bigintisnot directly in scope at all.
Since this can break unrelated code in surprising ways, I think it's not
wise for us to have these implementations. Maybe we can explore other
methods to compare with primitives in the future, though it won't be as
convenient as using the operators.