Auto-generated sum types
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Markdown
- Stars
- 6.6k
- Forks
- 1.7k
- Avg merge
- 16h 14m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
First, the idea was lain down by @glaebhoerl here.
The idea is basically to have a way to tell the compiler “please auto-generate me a sum trait for my -> impl Trait” function, that would automatically derive Trait based on the implementations of the individual members.
There would, I think, be a need for a syntax specially dedicated to this, so that people are not auto-generating these without being aware of it. Currently, the two syntaxes I can think of are either |value| (without a following {}), running on the idea of “this is auto-generated, just like closures” (I don't like it much, but it could make sense), and the other idea is to make it use a keyword. I'd have gone with auto, but it appears to not be reserved, and become or enum would likely be the best choices.
(Edit: @Pauan pointed out that the |…| syntax would be ambiguous in certain cases, so please disregard it)
So the syntax would, I think, look like this:
fn foo(x: bool) -> impl Iterator<Item = u8> {
if x { return become b"foo".iter().cloned() }
become b"hello".iter().map(|c| c + 1)
}
// Or:
fn foo(x: bool) -> impl Iterator<Item = u8> {
if x { return enum b"foo".iter().cloned() }
enum b"hello".iter().map(|c| c + 1)
}
// Or:
fn foo(x: bool) -> impl Iterator<Item = u8> {
if x { return |b"foo".iter().cloned()| }
|b"hello".iter().map(|c| c + 1)|
}
The major advantage of the || syntax is that it doesn't raise the issue of parenthesizing, as it's already made of parenthesis.
What do you think about this idea, especially now that impl Trait is landing and the need is getting stronger?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading the linked rust-lang/rust discussion and the prior comment referenced in this issue, then review how impl Trait and return-position opaque types are currently specified. The proposal is a language-design question about syntax and compiler-generated sum types; it is done only when the semantics, syntax, compatibility implications, and an accepted RFC direction are settled.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 15/100