Skip to content
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 no_std support #197

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jan 3, 2025
Merged

Conversation

mchodzikiewicz
Copy link
Contributor

This PR brings no_std support to shadow.

I tested it with my embassy project and it works like a charm.

Since now, this will require publishing two crates, shadow-rs and shadow-rs-consumer, note that shadow-rs depends on consumer crate to avoid breaking existing code that uses shadow-rs in both, [build-dependencies] and [dependencies] (I tested it to a limited degree).

It might be worth to consider to change the docs to always recommend adding shadow-rs-consumer to [dependencies] instead.

There's one related TODO in shadow-rs's Cargo.toml - once shadow-rs-consumer is published, I'd recommend to change this dependency to crates.io. This introduces a little bootstrapping problem in case shadow-rs-consumer will change. I left this unaddressed.

Move source of shadow-rs to a new folder and add it as a workspace member.
This is done because joined workspace and crate tomls are not specified
and they work only because of implementation details.
@mchodzikiewicz
Copy link
Contributor Author

this PR would close #91

@baoyachi baoyachi changed the base branch from master to no_std December 31, 2024 11:12
@baoyachi baoyachi merged commit 5edd913 into baoyachi:no_std Jan 3, 2025
10 checks passed
@baoyachi
Copy link
Owner

baoyachi commented Jan 3, 2025

Thx @mchodzikiewicz

@mchodzikiewicz
Copy link
Contributor Author

cool! what are the plans for a release?

@baoyachi
Copy link
Owner

baoyachi commented Jan 3, 2025

@mchodzikiewicz I plan to release it this week and need to make some modifications.

@mchodzikiewicz
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ah, sorry, I just noticed, I partially broke git module :(
I thought I only changed tests to make them pass but it turns not to be the case...
It's all about path in default constructor for GitCommandExecutor

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants