Trim21

Oh, I misunderstood you, yes this file isn't processed correctly, you are right. ------------------ Original ------------------ From: ***@***.***>; Date: 2021年8月14日(星期六) 晚上9:56 To: ***@***.***>; Cc: ***@***.***>; ***@***.***>; Subject: Re: [codecov/codecov-action] Make requirement that...

you can use [reviewdog](https://github.com/reviewdog/reviewdog) ```yaml name: Lint Other Language on: push: branches: - master paths: - "**.md" - "**.yaml" - "**.yml" - "**.html" - "**.json" pull_request_target: types: [opened, synchronize, reopened]...

any progress 👀?

I'd like to add another context about this impl. Key point here is not to use methods of `fiber.Ctx`, but to build a decoder for a Request struct and reuse...

I'll send a PR later

I guess yes https://github.com/gofiber/fiber/blob/v3-beta/go.mod#L3 , and my pr need new generic support .

Do we need to support multiples content type automatically binding like the old way? I'm thinking this may cause handle unmarshal some struct with with unexpected content type. Like a...

shoule we hide the original unmarshal message from `encoding.TextUnmarshaler.UnmarshalText` or `strconv.Parse{Int|Uint|Bool}`?

I wrap a `interface {Struct(s any) error}` in production code, it's only used in `example_test.go`, and go mod won't fetch test packages by default.

> Why don't we support map binding I think we can add old methods like `ctx.GetRespHeaders` back for this use case.