Closed tfwright closed 7 months ago
Thanks! This looks fine to me. I agree that we should make value
required too. I know it's strictly speaking not related to this PR, but I'm fine with sneaking it in :-)
@sasa1977 snuck it in :)
Finally merged, sorry for the delay, was a bit busy. Thanks for the contribution!
Resolves https://github.com/sasa1977/con_cache/issues/73
@sasa1977 thanks for considering these changes
I may have gone a little overboard on the README example changes. Let me know if you want me to scale that back :)
When considering addressing the use of the Item struct, it seemed like this line is conveying the point so I just changed it a bit to make the intention of the example more explicit.
Also, I normally wouldn't test code like this but let me know if you'd prefer to add something.
Finally, if you think this change does make sense, I wonder whether the value should be required as well?