Isolated Processes 14: Add traits for process-backend implementations - #202
Open
marti4d wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
We are about to have a second set of implementations for the various process-backend types (the remote kind). We can, of course, implement the `ProcessInspector` traits for each of these, individually, but I think it makes good sense from an API perspective for process-backend to establish "this is my contract" rather than having two separate contracts for `local` and `remote` implementations. Of course, the nice part is that now `ProcessInspector` can be blanket implementated for all `Backend` types at once.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We are about to have a second set of implementations for the various process-backend types (the remote kind).
We can, of course, implement the
ProcessInspectortraits for each of these, individually, but I think it makes good sense from an API perspective for process-backend to establish "this is my contract" rather than having two separate contracts forlocalandremoteimplementations.Of course, the nice part is that now
ProcessInspectorcan be blanket implementated for allBackendtypes at once.