refactor!: API ergonomics — &[Jid], #[non_exhaustive], PartialEq/Eq by jlucaso1 · Pull Request #457 · oxidezap/whatsapp-rust

jlucaso1 · 2026-03-28T21:32:12Z

Summary

BREAKING: Improves public API ergonomics across features.

`&[Jid]` instead of `Vec<Jid>` (HIGH)

Status::send_text, send_image, send_video, send_raw, revoke now take &[Jid] instead of Vec<Jid>
Callers no longer forced to allocate a Vec — can pass &[jid1, jid2] or &existing_vec
Internal send_status_message updated accordingly

`#[non_exhaustive]` on public enums (MEDIUM)

Adding variants to these enums is no longer a semver-breaking change:

StatusPrivacySetting, PresenceStatus, PinDuration, RevokeType
GroupType, ChatStateType
NewsletterVerification, NewsletterState, NewsletterRole

`PartialEq`/`Eq` on public structs (MEDIUM)

Users can now compare these types directly:

GroupMetadata, GroupParticipant, CreateGroupResult
SendResult
NewsletterMetadata, NewsletterVerification, NewsletterState, NewsletterRole
CreateCommunityOptions, CreateCommunityResult, CommunitySubgroup
LinkSubgroupsResult, UnlinkSubgroupsResult

Not included (deferred)

Serialize/Deserialize: Requires enabling the serde feature on wacore-binary for Jid — left for a separate PR
Builder pattern consistency: Low severity, deferred
Error type context: Low severity, deferred

Test plan

cargo clippy --all --tests — zero warnings
cargo fmt --all — clean
No e2e tests use the status API directly

Summary by CodeRabbit

New Features / Improvements
- Status-sending APIs now accept slice references for recipients, simplifying call sites and reducing ownership requirements.
- Documentation example updated to demonstrate the new slice-based usage.
Chores
- Several public types now support value-based equality comparisons.
- Multiple enums marked forward-compatible to allow safe future extension.

BREAKING: Status::send_* methods now take `&[Jid]` instead of `Vec<Jid>`, removing the forced allocation on callers. Existing code using `vec![...]` can switch to `&[...]` or pass `&vec`. Also: - Add #[non_exhaustive] to 9 public enums so new variants aren't breaking - Add PartialEq/Eq to 10+ public structs (GroupMetadata, SendResult, NewsletterMetadata, community types, etc.) - Add PartialEq/Eq to NewsletterVerification, NewsletterState, NewsletterRole

coderabbitai · 2026-03-28T21:32:28Z

Caution

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 19b5a62d-5f2a-499d-ab6b-717100337e64

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between fce2c16 and 2e0723f.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

src/features/newsletter.rs

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Added #[non_exhaustive] to several public enums and expanded PartialEq, Eq derives on multiple public types. Several recipient parameters changed from Vec<Jid> to borrowed &[Jid] in status/send APIs; example doc updated accordingly.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Enum non-exhaustive markers `src/features/chatstate.rs`, `src/features/community.rs`, `src/features/newsletter.rs`, `src/features/presence.rs`, `src/features/status.rs`, `src/send.rs`	Added `#[non_exhaustive]` to public enums (ChatStateType, GroupType, NewsletterMessageType, NewsletterVerification, NewsletterState, NewsletterRole, PresenceStatus, StatusPrivacySetting, PinDuration, RevokeType) to prevent exhaustive matching.
Derived equality on public types `src/features/community.rs`, `src/features/groups.rs`, `src/features/newsletter.rs`, `src/send.rs`	Added `PartialEq` and `Eq` to multiple structs/enums (CreateCommunityOptions, CreateCommunityResult, CommunitySubgroup, LinkSubgroupsResult, UnlinkSubgroupsResult, GroupMetadata, GroupParticipant, CreateGroupResult, NewsletterMetadata, NewsletterVerification, NewsletterState, NewsletterRole, SendResult) enabling value equality checks.
Recipient API signatures `src/features/status.rs`, `src/send.rs`	Changed recipient parameters from owned `Vec<Jid>` to borrowed slices `&[Jid]` for: Status::send_text, send_image, send_video, send_raw, revoke, and Client::send_status_message; adjusted call sites/doc example to pass `&recipients`.
Minor call-site iteration fix `src/send.rs`	Adjusted recipient resolution to clone `jid` where needed when iterating borrowed recipients.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes

Possibly related PRs

feat: status sending #299: Modifies the same status APIs and send_status_message signature from Vec<Jid> to &[Jid]; closely related to recipient-slice changes.
feat: improve send group message #259: Also changes send/recipient handling and iteration semantics in send.rs; overlapping call-site and ownership adjustments.
refactor: replace stringly-typed APIs with enums across codebase #440: Touches newsletter enums/types in src/features/newsletter.rs, overlapping with added non_exhaustive/derive changes.

Poem

🐰 I hop through code with joyful cheer,
Non-exhaustive doors now open near,
Slices of Jids I lightly bear,
Equality blossoms everywhere —
A tiny rabbit, changelog clear!

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately and specifically summarizes the three main changes: API parameter ergonomics (&[Jid]), forward-compatibility marking (#[non_exhaustive]), and trait derivations (PartialEq/Eq).
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	Docstring coverage is 100.00% which is sufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

📝 Generate docstrings

Create stacked PR
Commit on current branch

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests
Commit unit tests in branch refactor/api-ergonomics

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

github-actions · 2026-03-28T21:36:40Z

Bencher Report

Branch	refactor/api-ergonomics
Testbed	ubuntu-latest

🚨 1 Alert

Benchmark	Measure Units	View	Benchmark Result (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary (Limit %)
libsignal_benchmark::session_optimization_group::bench_decrypt_with_previous_session previous_session:setup_with_archived_sessions()	Instructions instructions x 1e3	📈 plot 🚷 threshold 🚨 alert (🔔)	47.13 x 1e3 (+9.30%) Baseline: 43.12 x 1e3	45.28 x 1e3 (104.09%)

Click to view all benchmark results

Benchmark	Instructions	Benchmark Result instructions (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary instructions (Limit %)
binary_benchmark::attr_parser_group::bench_attr_parser attr_lookup:setup_attr_marshaled()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	6,197.00 (-5.41%) Baseline: 6,551.71	6,879.30 (90.08%)
binary_benchmark::child_iteration_group::bench_get_children_by_tag	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	524,304.00 (-27.23%) Baseline: 720,532.44	756,559.06 (69.30%)
binary_benchmark::jid_optimization_group::bench_jid_to_owned_access jid_access:setup_jid_heavy_marshaled()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	20,868.00 (-5.71%) Baseline: 22,131.34	23,237.91 (89.80%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_allocating	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	98,202.00 (-16.92%) Baseline: 118,194.92	124,104.66 (79.13%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_auto_allocating	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	98,230.00 (-10.19%) Baseline: 109,374.64	114,843.38 (85.53%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_auto_huge_bytes_allocating	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	532,948.00 (-0.11%) Baseline: 533,528.60	560,205.03 (95.13%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_auto_long_string	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	15,870.00 (-4.75%) Baseline: 16,660.89	17,493.93 (90.72%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_auto_many_children_allocating	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	14,715,201.00 (-8.05%) Baseline: 16,002,795.90	16,802,935.70 (87.58%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_exact_allocating	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	118,358.00 (-20.72%) Baseline: 149,284.51	156,748.73 (75.51%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_exact_huge_bytes_allocating	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	534,378.00 (-0.11%) Baseline: 534,949.39	561,696.86 (95.14%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_exact_long_string	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	17,919.00 (-4.24%) Baseline: 18,712.21	19,647.82 (91.20%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_exact_many_children_allocating	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	28,066,347.00 (-21.75%) Baseline: 35,865,959.41	37,659,257.38 (74.53%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_huge_bytes_allocating	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	533,387.00 (-0.11%) Baseline: 533,967.60	560,665.97 (95.13%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_long_string	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	15,843.00 (-7.42%) Baseline: 17,113.00	17,968.64 (88.17%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_many_children_allocating	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	14,716,627.00 (-8.04%) Baseline: 16,003,914.74	16,804,110.48 (87.58%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_reusing_buffer	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	107,945.00 (-13.44%) Baseline: 124,706.79	130,942.13 (82.44%)
binary_benchmark::marshal_group::bench_marshal_reusing_buffer_vec_writer	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	98,302.00 (-10.18%) Baseline: 109,446.64	114,918.98 (85.54%)
binary_benchmark::roundtrip_group::bench_roundtrip large:setup_large_marshaled()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	90,974.00 (-5.39%) Baseline: 96,152.96	100,960.60 (90.11%)
binary_benchmark::roundtrip_group::bench_roundtrip small:setup_small_marshaled()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	7,378.00 (-3.47%) Baseline: 7,643.06	8,025.21 (91.94%)
binary_benchmark::roundtrip_group::bench_roundtrip_auto large:setup_large_marshaled()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	91,005.00 (-1.81%) Baseline: 92,678.11	97,312.01 (93.52%)
binary_benchmark::roundtrip_group::bench_roundtrip_auto small:setup_small_marshaled()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	7,401.00 (+0.36%) Baseline: 7,374.12	7,742.83 (95.59%)
binary_benchmark::roundtrip_group::bench_roundtrip_exact large:setup_large_marshaled()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	106,790.00 (-1.54%) Baseline: 108,463.11	113,886.26 (93.77%)
binary_benchmark::roundtrip_group::bench_roundtrip_exact small:setup_small_marshaled()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	8,913.00 (+0.30%) Baseline: 8,886.12	9,330.43 (95.53%)
binary_benchmark::unmarshal_group::bench_unmarshal large:setup_large_marshaled()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	41,989.00 (-8.03%) Baseline: 45,656.19	47,939.00 (87.59%)
binary_benchmark::unmarshal_group::bench_unmarshal small:setup_small_marshaled()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	2,717.00 (-4.04%) Baseline: 2,831.49	2,973.07 (91.39%)
binary_benchmark::unpack_group::bench_unpack_compressed	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	556,092.00 (+2.34%) Baseline: 543,377.13	570,545.99 (97.47%)
binary_benchmark::unpack_group::bench_unpack_uncompressed	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	771.00 (-0.30%) Baseline: 773.34	812.01 (94.95%)
libsignal_benchmark::conversation_group::bench_full_dm_conversation full:setup_conversation_data()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	27,604,463.00 (-0.35%) Baseline: 27,701,417.90	29,086,488.79 (94.90%)
libsignal_benchmark::dm_group::bench_dm_decrypt_first_message decrypt_prekey:setup_dm_with_first_message()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	5,544,828.00 (-0.06%) Baseline: 5,547,916.49	5,825,312.32 (95.19%)
libsignal_benchmark::dm_group::bench_dm_encrypt_first_message first_msg:setup_dm_session()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	175,061.00 (-1.36%) Baseline: 177,478.43	186,352.35 (93.94%)
libsignal_benchmark::dm_group::bench_dm_encrypt_subsequent_message subsequent:setup_established_dm_session()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	175,710.00 (-1.43%) Baseline: 178,257.66	187,170.55 (93.88%)
libsignal_benchmark::dm_group::bench_dm_session_establishment setup:setup_dm_users()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	17,354,982.00 (+0.43%) Baseline: 17,280,268.24	18,144,281.65 (95.65%)
libsignal_benchmark::group_messaging_group::bench_group_create_distribution_message create:setup_group_sender()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	298,417.00 (+0.57%) Baseline: 296,734.29	311,571.00 (95.78%)
libsignal_benchmark::group_messaging_group::bench_group_decrypt_message decrypt:setup_group_with_encrypted_message()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	12,627,094.00 (+0.25%) Baseline: 12,595,395.99	13,225,165.79 (95.48%)
libsignal_benchmark::group_messaging_group::bench_group_encrypt_message encrypt:setup_group_with_distribution()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	719,597.00 (+0.39%) Baseline: 716,805.43	752,645.70 (95.61%)
libsignal_benchmark::session_optimization_group::bench_decrypt_with_previous_session previous_session:setup_with_archived_sessions()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold 🚨 view alert (🔔)	47,129.00 (+9.30%) Baseline: 43,120.30	45,276.31 (104.09%)
libsignal_benchmark::session_optimization_group::bench_message_key_eviction eviction:setup_message_key_eviction()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	15,561,842.00 (+0.00%) Baseline: 15,561,762.40	16,339,850.52 (95.24%)
libsignal_benchmark::session_optimization_group::bench_out_of_order_decryption out_of_order:setup_out_of_order_messages()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	5,378,778.00 (-1.87%) Baseline: 5,481,455.24	5,755,528.00 (93.45%)
libsignal_benchmark::session_optimization_group::bench_promote_matching_session promote:setup_promote_matching_session()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	312,188.00 (-62.05%) Baseline: 822,532.97	863,659.61 (36.15%)
libsignal_benchmark::signature_group::bench_key_generation keygen	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	2,830,547.00 (+0.18%) Baseline: 2,825,349.30	2,966,616.77 (95.41%)
libsignal_benchmark::signature_group::bench_signature_creation sign:setup_keypair_with_message()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	3,452,844.00 (-0.54%) Baseline: 3,471,626.10	3,645,207.40 (94.72%)
libsignal_benchmark::signature_group::bench_signature_verification verify:setup_keypair_with_message()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	125,458,568.00 (+0.09%) Baseline: 125,345,258.53	131,612,521.46 (95.32%)
reporting_token_benchmark::content_extraction_group::bench_content_extraction extended:setup_extended_message()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	12,002.00 (+1.56%) Baseline: 11,817.80	12,408.69 (96.72%)
reporting_token_benchmark::content_extraction_group::bench_content_extraction simple:setup_simple_message()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	3,930.00 (+2.53%) Baseline: 3,832.88	4,024.53 (97.65%)
reporting_token_benchmark::full_generation_group::bench_full_token_generation extended:setup_full_gen_extended()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	87,073.00 (-0.81%) Baseline: 87,786.85	92,176.19 (94.46%)
reporting_token_benchmark::full_generation_group::bench_full_token_generation simple:setup_full_gen_simple()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	79,022.00 (-1.00%) Baseline: 79,824.23	83,815.44 (94.28%)
reporting_token_benchmark::key_derivation_group::bench_key_derivation	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	50,375.00 (-1.09%) Baseline: 50,932.53	53,479.15 (94.20%)
reporting_token_benchmark::message_encoding_group::bench_message_encoding extended:setup_extended_message()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	5,956.00 (+3.25%) Baseline: 5,768.51	6,056.94 (98.33%)
reporting_token_benchmark::message_encoding_group::bench_message_encoding simple:setup_simple_message()	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	2,227.00 (+4.63%) Baseline: 2,128.44	2,234.87 (99.65%)
reporting_token_benchmark::token_calculation_group::bench_token_calculation	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	21,920.00 (+0.01%) Baseline: 21,917.79	23,013.68 (95.25%)

🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

jlucaso1 · 2026-03-28T21:40:41Z

@claude review

claude · 2026-03-28T21:40:54Z

Claude finished @jlucaso1's task in 45s —— View job

Code Review: API Ergonomics Improvements

Read changed files
Provide review feedback

Verdict: LGTM — clean, well-scoped breaking change. A few minor observations below.

`&[Jid]` → slice migration (status + send)

Clean improvement. The .clone() added at src/send.rs:331 is the correct consequence of iterating over &[Jid] instead of owned Vec<Jid> — the else branch now borrows from the slice so it needs an explicit clone to push into resolved_recipients. No concerns here.

The doc example update (vec![...] → [...] + &recipients) is correct and consistent with the new signatures.

`#[non_exhaustive]` additions

All 8 enums are good candidates. One thing to note: ChatStateType, PresenceStatus, StatusPrivacySetting, and PinDuration use StringEnum derive — worth verifying that #[non_exhaustive] doesn't interfere with that proc macro's generated match arms. Since this is on the defining crate side (not downstream), the generated code should be fine, but something to keep in mind if StringEnum generates exhaustive matches externally.

`PartialEq`/`Eq` derives

All struct fields in the annotated types are themselves Eq-compatible (Jid, String, Option<String>, Vec<Jid>, bool, u32, i64), so the derives are sound. GroupMetadata is the largest struct getting these traits (20+ fields) — equality checks will be field-by-field, which is fine for correctness but callers should be aware it's not free for hot paths.

Benchmark alert

The Bencher alert on bench_decrypt_with_previous_session (+9.30%) is unrelated to this PR — the change is purely at the type/signature level with no algorithmic impact on the libsignal benchmarks. Likely CI noise.

Suggestion (non-blocking)

NewsletterMessageType in src/features/newsletter.rs is conspicuously absent from the #[non_exhaustive] treatment while the other three newsletter enums got it. If it's intentional (e.g., stable/frozen enum), no issue — but if it was an oversight, it might be worth adding for consistency.

coderabbitai Bot added the breaking-change label Mar 28, 2026

refactor: add #[non_exhaustive] to NewsletterMessageType

2e0723f

jlucaso1 merged commit e0a128b into main Mar 28, 2026
7 of 8 checks passed

jlucaso1 deleted the refactor/api-ergonomics branch March 28, 2026 21:44

mintlify Bot mentioned this pull request Mar 28, 2026

Update API docs for &[Jid], #[non_exhaustive], and PartialEq/Eq oxidezap/whatsapp-rust-docs#149

Merged

coderabbitai Bot mentioned this pull request Mar 31, 2026

perf!: reduce allocations in upload, send, and Jid paths #471

Merged

3 tasks

This was referenced Jun 8, 2026

feat(media): high-level media message builders from UploadResponse #764

Merged

api: mark lib-constructed response/result structs #[non_exhaustive] for 1.0 #794

Merged

Navigation Menu

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

refactor!: API ergonomics — &[Jid], #[non_exhaustive], PartialEq/Eq - #457

refactor!: API ergonomics — &[Jid], #[non_exhaustive], PartialEq/Eq#457
jlucaso1 merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
refactor/api-ergonomics

jlucaso1 commented Mar 28, 2026 •

edited by coderabbitai Bot

Loading

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented Mar 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Review failed

Walkthrough

Changes

Estimated code review effort

Possibly related PRs

Poem

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Mar 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

jlucaso1 commented Mar 28, 2026

Uh oh!

claude Bot commented Mar 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

jlucaso1 commented Mar 28, 2026 • edited by coderabbitai Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary

&[Jid] instead of Vec<Jid> (HIGH)

#[non_exhaustive] on public enums (MEDIUM)

PartialEq/Eq on public structs (MEDIUM)

Not included (deferred)

Test plan

Summary by CodeRabbit

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented Mar 28, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Review failed

Walkthrough

Changes

Estimated code review effort

Possibly related PRs

Poem

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Mar 28, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Bencher Report

🚨 1 Alert

Uh oh!

jlucaso1 commented Mar 28, 2026

Uh oh!

claude Bot commented Mar 28, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Code Review: API Ergonomics Improvements

&[Jid] → slice migration (status + send)

#[non_exhaustive] additions

PartialEq/Eq derives

Benchmark alert

Suggestion (non-blocking)

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant

jlucaso1 commented Mar 28, 2026 •

edited by coderabbitai Bot

Loading

`&[Jid]` instead of `Vec<Jid>` (HIGH)

`#[non_exhaustive]` on public enums (MEDIUM)

`PartialEq`/`Eq` on public structs (MEDIUM)

coderabbitai Bot commented Mar 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Mar 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

claude Bot commented Mar 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

`&[Jid]` → slice migration (status + send)

`#[non_exhaustive]` additions

`PartialEq`/`Eq` derives