search

rust-itertools / itertools

Extra iterator adaptors, iterator methods, free functions, and macros.
https://docs.rs/itertools/
Apache License 2.0
2.62k stars 298 forks source link

Merge multipeek peeknth #940

Open Owen-CH-Leung opened 1 month ago

Owen-CH-Leung commented 1 month ago

As per #933 , this PR merges MultiPeek and PeekNth into a general private interface MultiPeekGeneral, with public type alias to define the compatible MultiPeek and PeekNth struct.

codecov[bot] commented 1 month ago

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 78.26087% with 15 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 94.32%. Comparing base (6814180) to head (4fc8456). Report is 94 commits behind head on master.

Files Patch % Lines
src/multipeek_general.rs 77.94% 15 Missing :warning:
Additional details and impacted files ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #940 +/- ## ========================================== - Coverage 94.38% 94.32% -0.07% ========================================== Files 48 48 Lines 6665 7013 +348 ========================================== + Hits 6291 6615 +324 - Misses 374 398 +24 ```

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

phimuemue commented 1 month ago

My suggestion: Deprecate multipeek and unify all the functionality into peek_nth.

Rationale: peek_nth is (advertised as) a drop-in replacement for std::iter::Peekable (nice for users), whereas multipeek offers exactly the same interface, but has subtle semantic differences (not nice for users if they are bitten by this).

And imho we should even un-fuse it to really be in line with std::iter::Peekable.

Philippe-Cholet commented 1 month ago

According to https://github.com/search?q=itertools+multipeek+reset_peek+lang%3ARust&type=code there is some real use of MultiPeek. Deprecate it seems excessive to me.

Maybe the status quo is not so bad.

I'm not opposed to unfuse it but it's a breaking change, I'd prefer to not break things for a while.