Separate packets in modules

[andrei-ng]

Closes #104, #43, #85 and #33 (I've added a new feature flag for older protocol versions)

[andrei-ng]

@CramBL , without fixing the visibility as done in second commit e4cfe2b I can't get the extraction of a single packet into own file to work.

Making pub(crate) fn validate and pub(crate) const PACKET_SIZE: is not a biggy. But what I don't get is why one needs to add the pub specifier to the tuple struct pub struct #ref_name<'a>(pub(crate) &'a [u8]); to get it to compile when the struct is moved to a different file. What is your expectation?

EDIT: Do you have any ideas for alternatives before proceeding with separating all the other packets?

EDIT2: I guess the answer is inded because of crossing the module boundary as stated here and I don't think there is any other fix except that ...

[CramBL]

@CramBL , without fixing the visibility as done in second commit e4cfe2b I can't get the extraction of a single packet into own file to work.

Making pub(crate) fn validate and pub(crate) const PACKET_SIZE: is not a biggy. But what I don't get is why one needs to add the pub specifier to the tuple struct pub struct #ref_name<'a>(pub(crate) &'a [u8]); to get it to compile when the struct is moved to a different file. What is your expectation?

EDIT: Do you have any ideas for alternatives before proceeding with separating all the other packets?

EDIT2: I guess the answer is inded because of crossing the module boundary as stated here and I don't think there is any other fix except that ...

I don't really have anything to add, it seems you answered all questions yourself.

considering the massive changes to the macro crate in #124 I would wait with doing macro related refactoring until we land that

[andrei-ng]

considering the massive changes to the macro crate in #124 I would wait with doing macro related refactoring until we land that

No worries, I will wait that we first merge in #130 and then change this PR. I only have a few visibility specifier changes in here.

[CramBL]

considering the massive changes to the macro crate in #124 I would wait with doing macro related refactoring until we land that

No worries, I will wait that we first merge in #130 and then change this PR. I only have a few visibility specifier changes in here.

#130 is merged

[andrei-ng]

#130 is merged

Awesome work @CramBL 🍾

I will check the changes needed for this one asap and push.

[andrei-ng]

@CramBL , @gwbres , please review when you get the chance

[CramBL]

I didn't look much on each individual file, I assume they were mostly just moved around.

I think it's a fantastic refactor, it's a huge improvement to project structure.

[andrei-ng]

I didn't look much on each individual file, I assume they were mostly just moved around.

I think it's a fantastic refactor, it's a huge improvement to project structure.

Yes, 98% just moved around. Only a few minor changes (1 packet renamed) and adding the new proto14 feature flag.

[CramBL]

Yes, 98% just moved around. Only a few minor changes (1 packet renamed) and adding the new proto14 feature flag.

I noticed those things, so, great! 🌟

[andrei-ng]

I am merging this so I can continue on the other PRs.