-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 113
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
easy::Value
equality doesn't handle keys being in other orders
#194
Comments
If we only delete by replacing the value with |
Good idea with the tombstones! EDIT: Looks like they aren't needed, there is |
`LinkedHashMap`s equality checked order when we don't want it to. It also isn't maintained. So we're switching to `IndexMap` Unfortunately, there are other ordering issues in the relevant test that makes it hard to get right, so went ahead and removed it. Fixes toml-rs#194
`LinkedHashMap`s equality checked order when we don't want it to. It also isn't maintained. So we're switching to `IndexMap` Unfortunately, there are other ordering issues in the relevant test that makes it hard to get right, so went ahead and removed it. Unfortunately, I didn't see any change in performance. Fixes toml-rs#194
`LinkedHashMap`s equality checked order when we don't want it to. It also isn't maintained. So we're switching to `IndexMap` Unfortunately, there are other ordering issues in the relevant test that makes it hard to get right, so went ahead and removed it. Unfortunately, I didn't see any change in performance. Fixes #194
Noticed this when porting
toml-rs
tests.linked_hash_map
requires two maps to have keys in the same order to be equal.Options
easy::Map
could have its own equalityindexmap
, which is whattoml-rs
usesremove
but I suspect that is less of a problem with us tracking table positions. We don't track inline table positions (Dotted key ordering isn't always preserved #163).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: