On Tue Jan 6, 2026 at 6:56 AM CET, Maurice Hieronymus wrote:
> On Mon, 2026-01-05 at 23:03 +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>> On Mon Jan 5, 2026 at 10:11 PM CET, Maurice Hieronymus wrote:
>> > Before I start implementing, I want to reach common ground.
>> >
>> > In my opinion a derive macro which implements Display would be
>> > perfectly fine, as long as the name suggests what it does. So for
>> > example #[derive(DisplayEnumVariant)]. This would communicate the
>> > intent clearly to the user.
>> >
>> > Benno, would you be okay with that? If not, Gary and Danilo, are
I'd prefer if we stay a bit more cautious about directly deriving
`Display`. The trait with the variant name sounds like a very sensible
idea.
We can talk about this in the team in our weekly meeting, they might
change my mind :)
>> > you
>> > fine with the proposed trait implementation (e.g. the variant_name
>> > function)?
>>
>> Actually, it might even be reasonable to have both. In the Nova
>> driver we have
>> the case that we want to print the enum variant exactly as it is
>> defined in the
>> code and a lowercase version of the enum variant.
>>
>> > Are there any common use-cases where one wants to change the case
>> > of
>> > the enum variants? If not, I would not implement an argument and
>> > rather
>> > name the macro accordingly, so the intent is clear.
>>
>> As mentioned above, we do have a case in Nova where we also want a
>> lowercase
>> representation to construct a firmware path with.
>
> So there would be the need to have two derive macros:
>
> 1. #[derive(DisplayEnumVariant)]
> Implements Display for all enum variants as they are (original case).
>
> 2. #[derive(ImplementVariantName(Case::Lowercase))]
> Implements the mentioned trait. Case could be an Enum where one could
> choose between Case::Lowercase and Case::Original.
You'll need to use a helper attribute, something like:
#[derive(VariantName)]
#[variant_name(case = "lowercase")]
Cheers,
Benno
