Past me was a dick who wrote bad commit messages. Present me is trying to do better so that future me doesn't hate present me quite so much when he's past me :D
Heck yes, good commit messages are valuable, though sometimes a one-liner is sufficient tbf. What I hate is people who don't clean up their commits, I view commits as a way to break down a change to understand it better; and as a forward-view to when you have to `git blame`.
That you do that pre-PR code review for yourself is a wonderful thing. Encouraging my colleagues to actually *look* at what they're proposing before they ask others to review it has been a theme of my last 2 years of work :D
Reasons to love SSDs nr 12652
When you are overcome with toe-tapping goodness on the hifi, your laptop doesn't get sad at being bounced around while it's compiling stuff.
Fortunately this library is pretty much 100% data manipulation so I don't think I need much in the way of mocking, but that's useful ideas to put in my toolbelt.
Yeah that's how I feel I ought to be treating this -- the doctests just show that I've not written bad examples. I'm just trying to decide between unit tests and integration tests for this. Perhaps I should sleep on the problem :D
I think that's a good way of thinking about it yes. Right now all my testing is doctests because I just wrote those while writing the crate - but I feel I ought to have more formal testing too.
Yeah, but where do I draw the line when 99% of the API is public? Do I bother with unit tests for specific testing, or do I try and cover all the code by means of integration tests? What about examples, do they count for coverage, or not? Such are my Monday evening ponderings.