# Objective
I just wanted to inspect `HashSet`s in `bevy-inspector-egui` but I
noticed that it didn't work for some reason. A few minutes later I found
myself looking into the bevy reflect impls noticing that `HashSet`s have
been covered only rudimentary up until now.
## Solution
I'm not sure if this is overkill (especially the first bullet), but
here's a list of the changes:
- created a whole new trait and enum variants for `ReflectRef` and the
like called `Set`
- mostly oriented myself at the `Map` trait and made the necessary
changes until RA was happy
- create macro `impl_reflect_for_hashset!` and call it on `std::HashSet`
and `hashbrown::HashSet`
Extra notes:
- no `get_mut` or `get_mut_at` mirroring the `std::HashSet`
- `insert[_boxed]` and `remove` return `bool` mirroring `std::HashSet`,
additionally that bool is reflect as I thought that would be how we
handle things in bevy reflect, but I'm not sure on this
- ser/de are handled via `SeqAccess`
- I'm not sure about the general deduplication property of this impl of
`Set` that is generally expected? I'm also not sure yet if `Map` does
provide this. This mainly refers to the `Dynamic[...]` structs
- I'm not sure if there are other methods missing from the `trait`, I
felt like `contains` or the set-operations (union/diff/...) could've
been helpful, but I wanted to get out the bare minimum for feedback
first
---
## Changelog
### Added
- `Set` trait for `bevy_reflect`
### Changed
- `std::collections::HashSet` and `bevy_utils::hashbrown::HashSet` now
implement a more complete set of reflect functionalities instead of
"just" `reflect_value`
- `TypeInfo` contains a new variant `Set` that contains `SetInfo`
- `ReflectKind` contains a new variant `Set`
- `ReflectRef` contains a new variant `Set`
- `ReflectMut` contains a new variant `Set`
- `ReflectOwned` contains a new variant `Set`
## Migration Guide
- The new `Set` variants on the enums listed in the change section
should probably be considered by people working with this level of the
lib
### Help wanted!
I'm not sure if this change is able to break code. From my understanding
it shouldn't since we just add functionality but I'm not sure yet if
theres anything missing from my impl that would be normally provided by
`impl_reflect_value!`
52a2a3b146