Skip to content

Bump strum to v0.27 #74

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 14, 2025
Merged

Bump strum to v0.27 #74

merged 1 commit into from
May 14, 2025

Conversation

gkobeaga
Copy link
Contributor

@gkobeaga gkobeaga commented Apr 24, 2025

This is a breaking change in the strum public API. Changed items in the public API for v0.27:

-pub fn strum::EnumProperty::get_int(&self, _prop: &str) -> core::option::Option<usize>
+pub fn strum::EnumProperty::get_int(&self, _prop: &str) -> core::option::Option<i64>

get_int is not used in biblatex. I am proposing this change because I am getting a strum version mismatch when compiling a project that depends on biblatex and also depends on the updated version of strum.

Looking at the typst dependency tree, strum is only used in biblatex, via hayagriva via typst-library, so no impact is expected in typst.

@PgBiel
Copy link
Contributor

PgBiel commented May 14, 2025

Seems fine in principle. cc @laurmaedje

@laurmaedje laurmaedje changed the title Bump strum to v0.27 Bump strum to v0.27 (breaking) May 14, 2025
@laurmaedje
Copy link
Member

A bit unfortunate that this is a breaking change in biblatex's public API, but I guess never updating strum again isn't the solution either, so it's probably fine?

@gkobeaga
Copy link
Contributor Author

To be clear, this does not change biblatex's public API. It is a breaking change for strum, but only for a function not used in biblatex. Sorry if I was not clear in the description.

@laurmaedje laurmaedje changed the title Bump strum to v0.27 (breaking) Bump strum to v0.27 May 14, 2025
@laurmaedje laurmaedje merged commit 21d46f9 into typst:main May 14, 2025
2 checks passed
@laurmaedje
Copy link
Member

Okay, thanks for the clarification! Then, it's no problem at all.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants