Rusty 🦀 Femboy 🏳️🌈@lemmy.blahaj.zone to Programmer Humor@lemmy.mlEnglish · 3 days agoI love Rustlemmy.blahaj.zoneexternal-linkmessage-square65fedilinkarrow-up11arrow-down10
arrow-up11arrow-down1external-linkI love Rustlemmy.blahaj.zoneRusty 🦀 Femboy 🏳️🌈@lemmy.blahaj.zone to Programmer Humor@lemmy.mlEnglish · 3 days agomessage-square65fedilink
minus-squareporous_grey_matter@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up0·3 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-up0·edit-23 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-squareporous_grey_matter@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up0·2 days agoEven if the tool works perfectly, you have to run it every time you change something. It’s not the end of the world, but it’s still much nicer to just have a macro to derive it at compile time.
minus-squareGetOffMyLan@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·edit-23 days agoI just use the HashCode class and compare the results. Pretty sure there’s a source generator for it as well nowadays.
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.
Even if the tool works perfectly, you have to run it every time you change something. It’s not the end of the world, but it’s still much nicer to just have a macro to derive it at compile time.
I just use the HashCode class and compare the results.
Pretty sure there’s a source generator for it as well nowadays.