-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 588
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Flatten serenity::model #2394
Comments
I'd nominate this to go into 0.13 - since literally every user interacts with the model in some way, this is a breaking change that would be widely felt, and we're already loaded pretty heavy on those for 0.12. |
Good point, I agree |
We could also just add What do you think about that? I think this feature would be very nice for new code written using serenity, to avoid noisy long paths and duplicate-ish imports. |
Is this intended to be open after this message by @mkrasnitski? |
Doesn't look like it. |
It would be better if all model types were accessible via just
serenity::model::ModelType
. I don't think anyone can remember which serenity::model submodule a model type belongs to.This would also make the job of
serenity::model::prelude
redundant.A few types should be renamed to be less ambiguous, like
Rule
andOptions
.There should ideally be redirects from the old paths to the new paths.
This needs to wait until at least after #2393
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: