Implement best::strbuf and best::result
#5
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This was supposed to be the implementation of
best::fmt, but I had to put together two significant prerequisites and it ended up feeling like it should be its own thing. This change addsbest::strbufandbest::textbuf, our owning string type.best::result, our version ofResult, and functions for constructing one out of abest::option.best::row_forward, the canonical way to flatten a tuple into some kind of call.best::text::operator<=>BEST_GUARD(), our version of Rust'stry!()/?and Abseil'sRETURN_IF_ERROR().best::encoding_error.