My least favorite Rust type
ridiculousfish.com
My least favorite Rust type
1–10 of 298 posts
Re: My least favorite Rust type
#2This was an enjoyable read, and also did an excellent job of explaining some issues I have frequently had work ranges, particularly having to borrow integers, which always feels awkward.
Re: My least favorite Rust type
#3I'm only just learning Rust so I don't know much about Rust development, but what are the chances that any of the suggestions listed at the end make it into the language?
Re: My least favorite Rust type
#4I wouldn't call it a wart, these things have been debated pretty extensively.
Re: My least favorite Rust type
#5I'm only just learning Rust so I don't know much about Rust development, but what are the chances that any of the suggestions listed at the end make it into the language?
I'd love to see RangeInclusive fixed in the manner described. Part of what's blocking such a fix is that we have hard backwards compatibility guarantees. We'd have to do some kind of edition-based transition, where ranges start desugaring to a different type in a new edition than they did in the previous edition. We could do that, and there are various discussions going on to consider such approaches, but we're somewhat hesitant to go down that path.
Re: My least favorite Rust type
#6I feel like this is an example of what Jonathan Blow calls a "Big Idea" or a "100% solution". His thesis is that when you make a feature of a language too abstract and usable in many different contexts, eventually there will be so many corner cases that the result will almost certainly be clunky and full of footguns.
He claims that language designers should aim for "80% solutions" instead, which cover most common usages but limit themselves enough to avoid complexity. This runs in contrast to a lot of commonly accepted language design wisdom.
Re: My least favorite Rust type
#7I wouldn't call it a wart, these things have been debated pretty extensively.
Just because it has been debated extensively doesn't mean it's not a wart.
Having run into the "reverse range does not contain what you obviously expect it to contain" before and wasting a few hours on it, like many other people have and will continue to do in the future, definitely makes me want to call it a wart.
Re: My least favorite Rust type
#8Why does Rust allow Ranges for types that don't have comparators in the first place?
Re: My least favorite Rust type
#9No post body was provided.
Re: My least favorite Rust type
#10I wouldn't call it a wart, these things have been debated pretty extensively.
Just because it has been debated extensively doesn't mean it's not a wart. Having run into the "reverse range does not contain what you obviously expect it to contain" before and wasting a few hours on it, like many other people have and will continue to do in the future, definitely makes me want to call it a wart.
Rust tries to be conservative with its semantics. You can always create your own range type and implement a deref/from for it to convert it to Rust range.