Module splitting

[RustyNova016]

I started splitting the modules into multiples ones according to #25. For now only Core is made, but I am creating this pull request for tracking and initial review

Here's some details:

• I changed the response_type macro to have absolute paths and thus being able to be used in children modules.
• I changed the way the separation comments are made. Now it is {request type} {apipath}, like shown in the official documentation. While the original ones are closer to string formatting, the new ones are easier to find with a ctrl-f from the official documentation.
• I also added a link to the official documentation for quick referencing
• The types have been sorted by order of appearances in the user documentation.

[InputUsername]

Hi @RustyNova016, for the next release (0.8.1) I'd like to merge this PR first, but there are merge conflicts now. Would you be able to solve those? If not, feel free to close this PR and create a new one.

I really like these changes though, great job 👍

[RustyNova016]

I finally got arround to finishing it.
But I gave up on the placeholders for the api responses. If anyone want free carpal tunnel, feel free to do it.

[InputUsername]

Thanks @RustyNova016 !! I will have a look later today.

But I gave up on the placeholders for the api responses. If anyone want free carpal tunnel, feel free to do it.

Haha, no problem at all. I'll see what I can do.

[InputUsername]

Not sure how you guys feel @RustyNova016 @shymega, but my personal preference for naming modules is <name>.rs over <name>/mod.rs.

With the latter, if you have multiple modules open in your editor they will all show up as mod.rs.

Thoughts?

[shymega]

So, my personal way of doing modules is based on logical assertions.

• If a module is limited to one module only, and does not use mod in the file, then $module.rs is suitable.
• If a module requires other files in the same directly, then the module should be called src/$moduleName/mod.rs, and use mod $child/pub mod $child in $moduleName/mod.rs, and work that way.

[RustyNova016]

I usually use the same logic as you @shymega, but here i's just future proofing.

Some pages might need to be split more, so I already made the mods ready to expand.

If it's an issue, I can put it back as single files. (It's pretty easy with the vscode extension)

[shymega]

I usually use the same logic as you @shymega, but here i's just future proofing.

Some pages might need to be split more, so I already made the mods ready to expand.

If it's an issue, I can put it back as single files. (It's pretty easy with the vscode extension)

Yeah, I don't disagree with future proofing. I mean, we're getting a steady stream of contributions (thank you!), and I think it makes sense to start preparing for future additions, making new PR diffs smaller.

@InputUsername What do you think?

[InputUsername]

After giving it some thought, I think this approach is fine. Everything looks good!

[shymega]

LGTM - thanks!