-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
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
add future-ext #234
add future-ext #234
Conversation
9fdc26d
to
9fb9873
Compare
9fb9873
to
8b5bc9b
Compare
8b5bc9b
to
fb1b83a
Compare
I find the syntax for `tokio::time::timeout` to be quite ugly, since it breaks the typical chained method calls. With the FutureExt trait we can just call `.with_timeout(..)` instead which seems to be a cleaner way to do it.
fb1b83a
to
0b84416
Compare
?brawl merge |
📌 Commit 0b84416 has been approved and added to the merge queue. Requested by: @TroyKomodo Approved by: @lennartkloock |
🎉 Build successful! Approved by: @lennartkloock |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #234 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 48.91% 49.75% +0.84%
==========================================
Files 199 201 +2
Lines 16329 16436 +107
==========================================
+ Hits 7987 8178 +191
+ Misses 8342 8258 -84
... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes
|
I find the syntax for
tokio::time::timeout
to be quite ugly, since it breaks the typical chained method calls. With the FutureExt trait we can just call.with_timeout(..)
instead which seems to be a cleaner way to do it.