better object duplicate error about transit_model

[datanel]

I agree this would be helpful

[woshilapin]

This message comes directly from https://github.com/CanalTP/typed_index_collection/blob/v1.1.0/src/error.rs#L7. The type of object is not known inside this generic library (we know the struct but can't really display anything). I see a few options on how to handle this problem (there might be more).

Fix in typed_index_collection

Doing this probably means to add an additional constraint on T like T: Display or T: Debug in order to be able to display the struct of the type of object.

I'm not really in favor of that solution because:

• adding a constraint only for reporting feels wrong (and might reduce the capabilities of typed_index_collection)
• implementation of Display or Debug is likely to not show only the type but the entire object, we don't have control on how users will implement these traits.

Introduce a Trait

To fix the previous solution, we could introduce a specific trait typed_index_collection::ObjectType for example. It's still adding a constraint to T but at least, we do not depend on implementation of Debug or Display that might not be to our taste.

Handle errors in transit_model

Most likely, we're gonna be able to create better error in transit_model. With thiserror for example, we could do something like this.

enum ObjectType {
	Network,
	Line,
	Etc,
} // Implement Display on that `enum`

#[derive(Error)]
enum TMError {
	#[error("identifier {1} of type {0} already exists")]
	IdentifierAlreadyExists(ObjectType, String, #[source] typed_index_collection::Error)
	#[error("other error")]
	OtherError,
}

Since we have plans to migrate transit_model from failure to a more modern framework (thiserror has been discussed for example), maybe this issue can be adressed once the migration happened? Note that we plan to do it but we didn't scheduled it yet and have no idea when it could happen.

[antoine-de]

will be closed by hove-io/typed_index_collection#11 no?

[woshilapin]

I don't think so since this piece of code is not going to output the type of object. However, we might be a step closer to achieve that.