Better Config struct about nrf-softdevice HOT 5 OPEN

What pattern do you want to use? Builder pattern?

from nrf-softdevice.

Not sure. Builders are nice but implementing them in the library is a bit verbose.

An alternative is just implementing Default, and then the user code can do this:

let config = nrf_softdevice::Config {
   field31: 123,
   field52: false,
   ..Default::default(),
}

This would make it so all fields are the default value excepts the ones explicitly set by the user.

from nrf-softdevice.

Yeah, builders are really verbose, but I think they are more idiomatic. Personally I like them mostly because they can have signatures like:

pub fn set_name<S: Into<String>(self, name: S) -> Self {
}

Using traits on the builder allows for cleaner user code.

from nrf-softdevice.

True. Most of the config fields are integers or enums though.

from nrf-softdevice.

I still think a builder would be the way to go eventually, but it's not a priority. And also we can wait to see how the library is used and if this is a requested feature.

from nrf-softdevice.