-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 108
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
easy::Value
equality doesn't handle keys being in other orders
#194
Comments
If we only delete by replacing the value with |
Good idea with the tombstones! EDIT: Looks like they aren't needed, there is |
`LinkedHashMap`s equality checked order when we don't want it to. It also isn't maintained. So we're switching to `IndexMap` Unfortunately, there are other ordering issues in the relevant test that makes it hard to get right, so went ahead and removed it. Fixes toml-rs#194
`LinkedHashMap`s equality checked order when we don't want it to. It also isn't maintained. So we're switching to `IndexMap` Unfortunately, there are other ordering issues in the relevant test that makes it hard to get right, so went ahead and removed it. Unfortunately, I didn't see any change in performance. Fixes toml-rs#194
`LinkedHashMap`s equality checked order when we don't want it to. It also isn't maintained. So we're switching to `IndexMap` Unfortunately, there are other ordering issues in the relevant test that makes it hard to get right, so went ahead and removed it. Unfortunately, I didn't see any change in performance. Fixes #194
Noticed this when porting
toml-rs
tests.linked_hash_map
requires two maps to have keys in the same order to be equal.Options
easy::Map
could have its own equalityindexmap
, which is whattoml-rs
usesremove
but I suspect that is less of a problem with us tracking table positions. We don't track inline table positions (Dotted key ordering isn't always preserved #163).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: