Rusty 🦀 Femboy 🏳️🌈@lemmy.blahaj.zone to Programmer Humor@lemmy.mlEnglish · 11 days agoI love Rustlemmy.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square51fedilinkarrow-up1316arrow-down123
arrow-up1293arrow-down1imageI love Rustlemmy.blahaj.zoneRusty 🦀 Femboy 🏳️🌈@lemmy.blahaj.zone to Programmer Humor@lemmy.mlEnglish · 11 days agomessage-square51fedilink
minus-squareporous_grey_matter@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up0·11 days agoIt’s not hard, just if you’re doing it for a struct with a lot of fields it’s a lot of boilerplate
minus-squareDeckweiss@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0arrow-down1·edit-211 days agoMy IDE can do that for me. And it was able to do that pre AI boom. Yes, the code ends up more verbose, but I just collapse it. So from a modern dev UX perspective, this shouldn’t be a major difference.
minus-squarekazaika@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·9 days agoWhat if youre working with library types? The problem is not not you compare a bunch of fields but that the implementation on those members is most likely bad.
It’s not hard, just if you’re doing it for a struct with a lot of fields it’s a lot of boilerplate
My IDE can do that for me. And it was able to do that pre AI boom. Yes, the code ends up more verbose, but I just collapse it.
So from a modern dev UX perspective, this shouldn’t be a major difference.
What if youre working with library types? The problem is not not you compare a bunch of fields but that the implementation on those members is most likely bad.