struct PizzaOrder {
size: PizzaSize,
toppings: Vec<Topping>,
crust_type: CrustType,
ordered_at: SystemTime,
}
The problem they want to address is partial equality when you want to compare orders but ignoring the ordered_at timestamp. To me, the problem is throwing too many unrelated concerns into one struct. Ideally instead of using destructuring to compare only the specific fields you care about, you'd decompose this into two structs: #[derive(PartialEq, Eq)]
struct PizzaDetails {
size: PizzaSize,
toppings: Vec<Topping>,
crust_type: CrustType,
… // additional fields
}
#[derive(Eq)]
struct PizzaOrder {
details: PizzaDetails,
ordered_at: SystemTime,
}
impl PartialEq for PizzaOrder {
fn eq(&self, rhs: &Self) -> bool {
self.details == rhs.details
}
}
I get that this is a toy example meant to illustrate the point; there are certainly more complex cases where there's no clean boundary to split your struct across. But this should be the first tool you reach for.PartialEq and Eq for PizzaDetails is good. If there is a business function that computes whether or not someone orders the same thing, then that should start by projecting the details.
It's not difficult to write the predicate same_details_as() and then it's obvious to reviewers if that's what we meant and discourages weird ad-hoc code which might stop working when the PizzaDetails is redefined.