der: remove Reader::read_value
#1887
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
This was added in #1877 but the real value of that PR was the automatic `read_nested` on `DecodeValue` impls. `Reader::read_value` isn't actually necessary for that at all. It may be useful in the future if we introduce a BER reader that can handle decoding constructed e.g. strings from indefinite length encoding, but since we don't actually have anything like that yet, removing this avoids some unnecessary duplication and API surface for the `Reader`.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This was added in #1877 but the real value of that PR was the automatic
read_nestedonDecodeValueimpls.Reader::read_valueisn't actually necessary for that at all.It may be useful in the future if we introduce a BER reader that can handle decoding constructed e.g. strings from indefinite length encoding, but since we don't actually have anything like that yet, removing this avoids some unnecessary duplication and API surface for the
Reader.