re #1923
#Cow for attachments
fickle citrus
i like this idea, but i am also seeing the need for a better rework of the http module in general
so we can do this for 0.14 but i think for 0.15 we need to strive for a better design overall
cobalt mica
I think I made them Cow for some update in the past but it may have been scrapped before we merged it
fickle citrus
separating the models into incoming and outgoing
plays into this
and actually naming them differently
i should look into why we scrapped it
cobalt mica
It was mostly done as a way to make it backwards compatible so we scrapped it when it was no longer needed if memory serves me right
cobalt mica
fickle citrus
o
cobalt mica
This was where I introduced it
cobalt mica
🐄
true stone
@spice tiger ?
fickle citrus
i agree with this change
cobalt mica
Using slices instead of cows makes some things impossible to do
For example it will not be possible to make a function that adds a file to it while the function itself owns the file
fn add_file(message: CreateMessage, path: &str) -> CreateMessage {
// something like this where it loads the file and adds it as a
// attachment is not possible with a slice
}
spice tiger
```rust
fn add_file(message: CreateMessage, path: &str) -> CreateMessage {
// ...
this can be worked around through refactoring
But I won't hold up the PR
cobalt mica
this can be worked around through refactoring
Not without ending up cloning the date
Or do you mean a refractor on the users end?
spice tiger
on the user's end