You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently you need a single application struct that provides all dependencies. This is typically accomplished with a single global invocation of the application macro. It would be nice if you could instead have one parent application that inherit the components from children applications. Something like this...
structMyApp;application!{self:MyAppchildren:[DataProvider]components:[MyService]// depends on DataComponent, which it pulls in via DataProvider}structDataProvider;application!{self:DataProvidercomponents[DataComponent]}
Maybe application would no longer be the right terminology. Maybe a more streamlined macro should be used.
Ideally, DataComponents could even be declared in a separate crate. But with the current design, I think the rust compiler will complain about forward compatibility issues with trait implementations if they are in separate crates.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently you need a single application struct that provides all dependencies. This is typically accomplished with a single global invocation of the application macro. It would be nice if you could instead have one parent application that inherit the components from children applications. Something like this...
Maybe
application
would no longer be the right terminology. Maybe a more streamlined macro should be used.Ideally, DataComponents could even be declared in a separate crate. But with the current design, I think the rust compiler will complain about forward compatibility issues with trait implementations if they are in separate crates.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: