-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Add RFC to feature gate some slice patterns
- Loading branch information
Showing
1 changed file
with
30 additions
and
0 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ | ||
- Start Date: 2014-07-14 | ||
- RFC PR #: (leave this empty) | ||
- Rust Issue #: (leave this empty) | ||
|
||
# Summary | ||
|
||
Rust's support for pattern matching on sices has grown steadily and incrementally without a lot of oversight, | ||
and we have concern that Rust is doing too much here, that the complexity is not worth it. This RFC proposes | ||
to feature gate multiple-element slice matches in the head and middle positions (`[..xs, 0, 0]` and `[0, ..xs, 0]`. | ||
|
||
# Motivation | ||
|
||
Some general reasons and one specific: first, the implementation of Rust's match machinery is notoriously complex, and not well-loved. Remove features is seen as a valid way to reduce complexity. Second, slice matching in particular, is difficult to implement, while also being of only moderate utility (there are many types of collections - slices just happen to be built into the language). Finally, the exhaustiveness check is not correct for slice patterns - because of their complexity; it's not known that it | ||
can be done correctly, nor whether it is worth the effort even if. | ||
|
||
# Detailed design | ||
|
||
The `advanced_slice_patterns` feature gate will be added. When the compiler encounters slice pattern matches in head or middle position it will emit a warning or error accourding to the current settings. | ||
|
||
# Drawbacks | ||
|
||
It removes two features that some people like. | ||
|
||
# Alternatives | ||
|
||
Fixing the exhaustiveness check would allow the feature to remain. | ||
|
||
# Unresolved questions | ||
|
||
N/A |