core
core copied to clipboard
Add `FixedArray::unsafe_get`, `FixedArray::unsafe_set`
From the provided git diff output, here are three potential issues or suggestions for improvement:
-
Redundant Implementations:
- The
git diffshows that bothop_getandgetare defined forFixedArray. Typically,op_getis the operator overload for the[]operator, andgetmight be a convenience method. However, having both can be redundant unless there is a specific reason for differentiation. If they perform the same operation, consider consolidating them to avoid confusion and maintainability issues.
-pub fn FixedArray::op_get[T](self : FixedArray[T], idx : Int) -> T = "%fixedarray.get" -pub fn FixedArray::get[T](self : FixedArray[T], idx : Int) -> T = "%fixedarray.get" - The
-
Unsafe Methods Naming Conventions:
- The introduction of
unsafe_getandunsafe_setmethods suggests that these operations bypass safety checks. It's crucial to ensure that the naming convention clearly indicates the unsafe nature of these operations to prevent accidental usage. Additionally, consider documenting the potential risks associated with these methods to warn developers.
/// @alert unsafe "This method bypasses bounds checking. Ensure the index is valid to avoid runtime errors." pub fn FixedArray::unsafe_get[T](self : FixedArray[T], idx : Int) -> T = "%fixedarray.unsafe_get" - The introduction of
-
Consistency in Method Definitions:
- When defining methods like
unsafe_set, ensure consistency in the formatting and spacing for better readability. The providedgit diffshows a slight inconsistency in howunsafe_setis formatted compared to other method definitions.
-pub fn FixedArray::unsafe_set[T]( - self : FixedArray[T], - idx : Int, - val : T -) -> Unit = "%fixedarray.unsafe_set" +pub fn FixedArray::unsafe_set[T](self : FixedArray[T], idx : Int, val : T) -> Unit = "%fixedarray.unsafe_set"Keeping the method definitions consistently formatted can enhance code readability and maintainability.
- When defining methods like
These suggestions aim to improve code clarity, reduce redundancy, and ensure safety warnings are clearly communicated.
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 3582
Details
- 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
- No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
- Overall coverage remained the same at 82.319%
| Totals | |
|---|---|
| Change from base Build 3580: | 0.0% |
| Covered Lines: | 4195 |
| Relevant Lines: | 5096 |