distinct MessageName and WireName types could be over-engineering, but WireName might be usefully faster for parsing a QNAME, and usefully stricter for RDATA fields that must not be compressed

ooh this is helpful, it tells me what my CPU is $ rustc --print target-cpus Available CPUs for this target: native - Select the CPU of the current host (currently skylake). (etc)

did i really just write 50 lines of rust that passed the compiler first time?!1?!/!?!eleventy?! with double indirections because peekable() is annoying?!

i’m staring at my dns name code and thinking that i have left case folding too late because it is making comparisons too complicated

i’m trying to make sure that my code doesn’t unnecessarily copy dns names e.g. let thing: BigStruct = fill_bigstruct_from(&data); i would like the filling to write directly to the caller’s stack frame and I’m looking at github.com/rust-lang/rust/is… so i need to do NRVO manually?

uh-oh, I made clippy ICE 🤓 paste.rs/Dy5

trying to choose a method name… reset? clear? I type “fn clear” then check what Vec calls it :- “clear”. Yay :-)

kind of disappointed that i need the impl here and now i’m not sure if the supertrait is doing anything useful trait HeapLen: DnsName { fn heap_len(&self) -> usize { 1 + self.labs() + self.nlen() } } impl<T: DnsName> HeapLen for T {}

the answer is that the supertrait is bringing the necessary methods into scope in the other case where i had a default function implementation, the methods it called were in the same trait

repeatedly trying to #[macro_use] a module and invoke one of its macros, and yet rustc insists the macro is not visible and have I forgotten to #[macro_use]?