Closed ckaran closed 2 years ago
Not sure if it makes sense since I can't see a use case and it would add some complexity, but I don't have a strong opinion. If you want to implement it, I can merge it.
Like I said, it's only mathematical pedantry, and possibly support for derive macros that are written outside of binary-layout
. I'll toss it in once I get this other PR worked out.
Yeah, so, this didn't work. Lots and lots of errors in compilation, followed by more and more hacking, turning the nice, clean code into an ugly, hacky mess. So I'm going to close this feature request without a PR, and pretend like I never thought of it...
Ok
On October 22, 2021 12:44:56 PM Cem Karan @.***> wrote:
Closed #10. — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS or Android.
This is more of mathematical pedantry than anything else. Feel free to take it or leave it as you wish.
For any type
T
, we can always lay it out asT
. This isn't a particularly useful operation, but it may make derive macros simpler (maybe). Would it make sense to make a blanket implementation for allT
like the following: