-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33
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
RFC 0040: Create proposal for a general mappings library/project #40
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Why not just use Mapping IO? |
|
I don't think not in house is a good excuse to not use something. If it works, we should use it. I can't really give input on that though since I don't know what exactly mappings IO does. Otherwise, this looks like a good plan to me. |
If code is constantly being duplicated between tools I see no reason not to have them as one project instead |
This isn't a good justification for not using something. Has mappings-io been investigated? We don't have to keep merging with upstream on it, but have we considered its strengths and weaknesses, and if it could possibly be used in the building of tiny utils? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In my opinion reducing the amount of duplicated code, as well as reducing the amount of different pieces of software used would be good
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think Fabric is changing to use Mapping IO everywhere, for example Loom and Lorenz Tiny have migrated, while in Enigma and Yarn there is an issue/pr to do so. We could use Mapping IO as a starting point for Tiny Utils
No description provided.