[2/n] [ls-apis] return walked dependencies instead of using a callback#10458
Open
sunshowers wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Created using spr 1.3.6-beta.1
sunshowers
commented
May 19, 2026
| /// that package. | ||
| /// | ||
| /// A package reachable by more than one path appears once per path. | ||
| pub found: Vec<(&'a Package, DepPath)>, |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should I make this something like a BTreeMap<&'a Package, Vec<DepPath>>? I didn't feel like it made much of a difference either way.
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
We're going to return more data from this function (the set of omitted nodes that were seen) in an upcoming PR.
I tried out a few different approaches:
Based on the prototyping I feel like this ends up being the cleanest approach.
There are no functional changes in this PR.
Best reviewed in conjunction with its dependent PR: