general cleanup and maintenance #362
Conversation
changed `StatusCode` from `i31` to `u16`. refactored logic expanded documentation added TODOs made some functions more generic (to improve API w/o causing breaking changes)
AnthonyMichaelTDM
force-pushed
the
maintenance-and-cleanup
branch
from
1f2f3d8 to
2277291
Compare
|
Whao! Thanks for taking the time to do this. Let's do this MR as usual, but going forward, it'll be much easier for me if we have smaller-sized changes! I know it's hard sometimes, especially when we combine everything from a working session into a single MR, but it makes it easier for me as I don't have all the time in the world (that way we can maintain shipping velocity!). I hope you understand :) 🤗 |
|
sure, I can have this as base then do subsequent PR's to address the TOOD's and whatnot |
|
I forgot why I hadn't merged this yet, it's been a while... |
|
Okay I think it's good now, gonna do one final review before I merge though |
| Ok(s) => Box::leak(s.into_boxed_str()).as_bytes(), | ||
| Err(_) => panic!("No SECRET_KEY environment variable set!"), | ||
| }, | ||
| secret: std::env::var("SECRET_KEY").map_or_else(|_| panic!("No SECRET_KEY environment variable set!"), |s| Box::leak(s.into_boxed_str()).as_bytes()), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we might be able to just use a .map(...).expect(...) since we panic anyway
| /// | ||
| /// panis if the `to` argument is not a valid email address | ||
| /// | ||
| /// TODO: wouldn't it be better to instead require the `to` argument be some wrapper around a string that is always a valid email address? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
answer: yes it would, but that's something to do in a different PR
StatusCodefromi31tou16.this is just a start, there's a lot of TODOs I still need to tackle as well