Skip to content

Conversation

GlenDC
Copy link
Collaborator

@GlenDC GlenDC commented Jul 16, 2025

No description provided.

Copy link
Collaborator

@randomPoison randomPoison left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As @gribozavr suggested, I think both of these slides would benefit from being split in two, where we start with a suboptimal API that allows incorrect usage, then demonstrate how typestate can make incorrect usage impossible.

@GlenDC GlenDC force-pushed the typestate-pattern branch from 141e680 to 602ef85 Compare August 2, 2025 09:00
@GlenDC GlenDC marked this pull request as draft August 2, 2025 09:15
@GlenDC GlenDC added the waiting for author Waiting on the issue author to reply label Aug 2, 2025
GlenDC added 3 commits August 2, 2025 11:18
this is again in the flow of a problem statement first,
building on our original example,
and in next slide we'll add the solution with generics
@GlenDC GlenDC force-pushed the typestate-pattern branch from d727cd7 to b61c337 Compare August 3, 2025 09:28
@GlenDC GlenDC removed the waiting for author Waiting on the issue author to reply label Aug 3, 2025
@GlenDC GlenDC marked this pull request as ready for review August 3, 2025 18:33
@GlenDC
Copy link
Collaborator Author

GlenDC commented Aug 3, 2025

The four slides in the typestate pattern chapter are ready for review again.

Note that the generics slide currently exceeds the height limit and fails the corresponding test. I’ve left it as-is for now, since I wasn’t sure how you’d prefer to address that. Let me know how you’d like to proceed.

Copy link
Collaborator

@randomPoison randomPoison left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is coming together nicely! I think we still need to break up the generics example since it's too much for a single slide, but the example itself is a good demonstration of typestate.

@djmitche djmitche removed their request for review August 8, 2025 01:57
@djmitche
Copy link
Collaborator

djmitche commented Aug 8, 2025

I've removed myself as reviewer as a form of load-shedding, but I looked through this a week or so ago and had no objections, so consider this a soft approval :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants