> as opposed to the article being discussed. I'd actually say that the article and my suggestion are basically compatible. If you check out my gist [1], you'll

> as opposed to the article being discussed. I'd actually say that the article and my suggestion are basically compatible. If you check out my gist [1], you'll see that I have basically the same number of user-facing types (or maybe a slightly smaller number as I merged a few structs and enums in some spots). [1]: https://gist.github.com/shepmaster/fb7f4c9519a074ea7186ca7b75afb9dd https://gist.github.com/shepmaster/fb7f4c9519a074ea7186ca7b7...