Scope API to wrapper types #92
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
djc
force-pushed
the
auth-handle
branch
3 times, most recently
from
585cd1d to
bc55313
Compare
Collaborator
|
I'll take a look at this soon. Thanks! |
cpu
approved these changes
Mar 16, 2025
Collaborator
cpu
left a comment
cpu
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice! This is really cool and not how I was thinking of approaching this. I like the end result 👍
I had a handful of comments but they're basically all related to documentation/comments.
Owner
Author
|
Cool! What do you think of the |
Collaborator
I felt the same. Any alternatives I could think up felt even more awkward. |
Owner
Author
|
Merged this but happy to take additional feedback on the comments/changes. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Here's an attempt at making the API a little more restricted while also moving more logic into the library. I quite like it, but curious for your thoughts. It also helps a little with the boilerplate across examples/tests.
I guess one downside is that this only exposes
ChallengeHandle::set_ready()which is only accessible indirectly. So if you want to gather all the challenges (across authorizations) and then mark them ready in one go (so you can do a single transaction or whatever against your DNS server or other challenge response infrastructure), you have to iterate over the authorizations and get the challenges twice. Maybe not a big deal?