Faye Amacker

Thanks for opening this issue! The first two options (current behavior or returning error) sounds good. The third option (substitute value) brings up some questions and edge cases: - do...

@benluddy That sounds great! :+1: > Does my proposed answer to the first question help answer this one? Yes because users can specify unique substitute values for unassigned simple value...

Thanks Ben! Closed by #481.

@benluddy Thanks for this POC and discussion in issue #477. I focused on big picture since this has draft status. If my understanding is correct, use cases are: - no...

@benluddy Thanks for updating this PR! I'll take a closer look this week ~~(hopefully tomorrow)~~. :pray:

> Would you accept a more limited option for today that allows users to configure only which simple values their protocol rejects, without touching how accepted simple values are decoded?...

@extemporalgenome Thanks for opening this issue! This sounds useful and makes sense. I'll look into it this month.

Thanks @benluddy for detailed write up in #449 and this POC! The POC covers all use cases you mentioned and the roundtrip tests illustrating those use cases are great! I...

> Would you prefer to see the TextConversions function replaced entirely by two decode options: one for decoding into strings and one for byte slices? @benluddy Yes, that would be...

Maybe this bugfix can be justified as part of larger PR #485 but I don't like changes that might be breaking changes for some. @benluddy what are your thoughts on...