Skip to content

Conversation

@LeoPatOZ
Copy link
Collaborator

Resolves #181

@LeoPatOZ LeoPatOZ requested a review from 0xNeshi November 21, 2025 09:53
@LeoPatOZ LeoPatOZ added the type: refactor Code improvement without changing functionality label Nov 21, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@0xNeshi 0xNeshi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

looking better, close to merging

}

impl<T: Clone, E: Error + Clone> PartialEq<Notification> for ScannerMessage<T, E> {
impl<T: Clone> PartialEq<Notification> for ScannerMessage<T> {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Try to implement impl<T: Clone> PartialEq<ScannerError> for Result<ScannerResult<T>> {, should make additional assert_next! variants redundant

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

related #200 (comment)

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

okay done! good catch.

Man i hate working with macros sometimes, the LSP doesnt help much

@0xNeshi 0xNeshi merged commit 63a9c19 into main Nov 21, 2025
13 checks passed
@0xNeshi 0xNeshi deleted the remove-scanner-error-enum branch November 21, 2025 13:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

type: refactor Code improvement without changing functionality

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Depend on Results Instead of Having ScannerMessage::Error

3 participants