Simplify Python binding of StorageConfig
#371
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
kylebarron
commented
Nov 4, 2024
Comment on lines
+33
to
+41
| impl From<PyS3Credentials> for StaticS3Credentials { | ||
| fn from(credentials: PyS3Credentials) -> Self { | ||
| StaticS3Credentials { | ||
| access_key_id: credentials.access_key_id, | ||
| secret_access_key: credentials.secret_access_key, | ||
| session_token: credentials.session_token, | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's useful to have a value-to-value From impl instead of just an impl on &PyS3Credentials so that you can avoid the clones when not needed.
kylebarron
commented
Nov 4, 2024
| } | ||
|
|
||
| #[classmethod] | ||
| #[pyo3(signature = ( | ||
| bucket, | ||
| prefix, | ||
| endpoint_url = None, | ||
| allow_http = None, | ||
| allow_http = false, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
allow_http can only be a bool, so why not default to false instead of defaulting to None and then unwrapping?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
no reason, just moving fast
kylebarron
commented
Nov 4, 2024
| allow_http: bool | None | ||
| region: str | None | ||
|
|
||
| def __init__(self, storage: Memory | Filesystem | S3): ... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's no #[new] method defined on StorageConfig, so it wasn't possible to directly construct this anyways.
kylebarron
commented
Nov 4, 2024
Comment on lines
+183
to
+185
| impl AsRef<StorageConfig> for PyStorageConfig { | ||
| fn as_ref(&self) -> &StorageConfig { | ||
| &self.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This AsRef impl means that if you have a PyStorageConfig and you want to access an &StorageConfig, you can just call .as_ref().
mpiannucci
approved these changes
Nov 4, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I'm starting to read through the storage binding for #266.
As it stands, you recreate the content of the struct in the Python binding as well, and then you convert the content of the struct in the Python bindings to the content of the struct in the Rust code.
In my opinion it's best to have as little logic as possible in the binding code and make it a slim wrapper around the underlying core Rust code. Minimizing the logic in the bindings also makes it simpler to make bindings to other languages in the future (#356)