You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
While some types should indeed be unsupported, markers probably should be supported, maybe even all zero size types? Not sure how one would go about fixing this other than potentially just extending type_bits to support marker types, but this disqualifies user defined markers, so doesn't seem like the best solution.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Well yes, maybe the best idea would be to just support zero sized types for fields without accessors (prefixed with _).
However, it is somewhat difficult to find out the size of a type in a procedural macro, as it has no access to detailed type information (only basic Tokens). With generics this becomes even more difficult...
Zero-sized members are now supported (prefixed by #[bits(0)]). They are ignored by the bitfield generation.
Generics, however, are still difficult. I might look into that in the future, but I can't promise.
The following sample
Fails to compile with the following error:
While some types should indeed be unsupported, markers probably should be supported, maybe even all zero size types? Not sure how one would go about fixing this other than potentially just extending
type_bits
to support marker types, but this disqualifies user defined markers, so doesn't seem like the best solution.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: