move percent_encoding to its own crate #347
Conversation
url_serde/src/lib.rs
Outdated
| define_encode_set! { | ||
| /// This encode set is used in the URL parser for query strings. | ||
| pub QUERY_ENCODE_SET = [::url::percent_encoding::SIMPLE_ENCODE_SET] | {' ', '"', '#', '<', '>'} | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why does this need to be done here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Um, I have no idea why this is here...
| /// # } | ||
| /// ``` | ||
| #[macro_export] | ||
| macro_rules! define_encode_set { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't there a way to reexport a macro from a different crate?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IIRC the only way on current stable Rust is pub use some_crate::*;, which of course also re-exports other things.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's #[macro_reexport], which is unstable, and there's a the glob trick, which I'm still not certain is on purpose, but still, it re-exports too many things, so duplicating the macro seems required...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@nox you said in IRC you prefer the glob trick. To reiterate, that requires a pub use percent_encoding::* inside the url root. That would suddenly make all the things normally in that module/crate pollute the url namespace. Suddenly there is url::SIMPLE_ENCODE_SET, besides url::percent_encoding::SIMPLE_ENCODE_SET and friends.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can't you just put the macro in a submodule of percent_encoding and glob import that module from both percent_encoding and url?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's possible, but puts another public (useless) module in the percent_encoding crate. Of all the possible options, I find just redefining the macro in url to be the best.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Given both crates are in the same repository, IMO it is better to just make a #[doc(hidden)] module and avoid the duplication of the macro, but I'll let @SimonSapin the final say.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When macros 2.0 arrive (already major pieces in nightly!), they can be named explicit, so it could eventually just become in url pub use percent_encoding::define_encode_set;.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unfortunately I don't think these two crates can really afford to rely on hot new stuff, given how central it is to the ecosystem.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can cross that bridge when we get there, but this crate has already made upgrades to 1.15, and other than using the newest the day after, it seems to be fine to upgrade to newer version.
percent_encode/Cargo.toml
Outdated
| @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ | |||
| [package] | |||
| name = "percent_encode" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll let @SimonSapin decide on the crate name.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
11:10 <•SimonSapin> nox: if we’re splitting hairs, I think "encoding" is the general mechanism and the two specific (opposite) operations are "encode" and "decode"
Let's name it percent_encoding.
I’m kind of splitting hairs, but I’d prefer |
seanmonstar
force-pushed
the
percent-encode
branch
from
a40b2d2 to
31c6f04
Compare
|
Renamed to |
|
@SimonSapin or @nox, r? |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #335) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
Move percent encoding to its own crate This is a rebase of #347 with some additional changes. Original work by @seanmonstar. Fixes #347. <!-- Reviewable:start --> --- This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/rust-url/362) <!-- Reviewable:end -->
|
Landed in #362. Thanks! |
percent_encode, but I could update it to bepercent_encodingif preferred.define_encode_setduplicated, to maintain backwards compatibility forurl.url, and so it can't make API breaking changes easily without affectingurl.This change is