More into_future usage
#663
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
bmc-msft
reviewed
Feb 24, 2022
bmc-msft
approved these changes
Feb 24, 2022
rylev
force-pushed
the
into-future-expansion
branch
from
9cd597f to
fa4e8a8
Compare
This was referenced Feb 25, 2022
Merged
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Worked on with @yoshuawuyts
In #510 we decided on the
into_futurepattern for operations. These PR takes that pattern and simply applies it to more operations in the cosmos crate.We also introduced a new feature which allows the hopefully soon to be stabilized
IntoFuturefrom the standard library.We were able to get through all operations in cosmos up to
delete_user. This PR might be easier to review commit by commit as opposed to all at once.