Mo Bitar

Improved in the upcoming version 6: https://github.com/rust-lang/rustlings/blob/v6/exercises/12_options/options1.rs

Hi @hamirmahal, I am a new maintainer and didn't deal with the CI configuration yet. My priority is to release version 6 soon. I will look at this PR afterwards.

Closing the PR because of merge conflicts. I will take care of this issue in version 7 (no due date) because it is a breaking change.

I think that the ability to skip exercises with the new list mode in version 6 is enough. Otherwise, a new set of exercises for advanced devs can be created...

I decided to remove the comma because I am not sure about it. But thank for adding the dot :D

I do think that types have to be preserved. That is why I support the first option, too.

That spam with codecov…

See https://github.com/idanarye/rust-typed-builder/issues/14 and my algorithm https://codeberg.org/mo8it/sus-impls The macro has to use the algorithm to generate implementations

I think opt-in is a good idea. Something like `setter(strip_option, option_method)`

I would implement it like this: ```rust fn build(self) -> Result { … validate(S {x, y}) } ``` Where `validate` is a function pointer `fn(S) -> Result` that is specified...