Ashley Mannix

We should figure out `cfg` too: ```rust log!("{#[cfg(debug_assertions)] #[display] a}") ```

For `#[cfg]` we can probably just special-case the attribute and ensure it’s included wherever the field value is referred to.

If it's possible for us to support this without breaking existing serialized values (I think non-self-describing formats like `bincode` can be tricky because we can't switch on the type of...

One of the goals of our `2.0.0` release is to separate the public flags from a private type that we control through the macro. This means we would be able...

Hi @CasperN! :wave: We can't consider any changes to the `bits()` method, because the library is already stable. The way we modeled this originally was that the flags represents a...

We could also use `#[repr(transparent)]` for this. I don’t think that’s too much of a semantic hijacking, so long as it also does apply the attribute.

In #278 we merged an implementation that allows iterating over flags and their names. It effectively looks like: ```rust pub fn iter(self) -> impl Iterator

Can we think of any other implementation for `Arbitrary` that a consumer might want to add themselves? If not then this seems like a reasonable addition to me, since as...

cc @konsumlamm @Arturoc What do you all think of this new internal library organization? Are you happy with this direction?

Alrighty! I think the only thing remaining before we could consider stabilizing is adding an associated type for the iterator to the `BitFlags` trait, so that you can name it....