Trait sugar syntax for `maker` `trait` and implementing the same maker trait for multiple type
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Markdown
- Stars
- 6.6k
- Forks
- 1.7k
- Avg merge
- 16h 14m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
Hello there, here is just a personal suggestion to keep the consistency between declaring a empty struct / marker trait, nothings really important but anyway ^^
struct Empty; // ok
struct Empty {} // ok
trait SignedInteger; // currently not ok
trait SignedInteger {} // ok
impl SignedInteger for i8; // currently not ok
impl SignedInteger for i8 {} // ok
Also, sometime implementing the same maker trait for multiples types can be helpful (instead of using macro) :
impl SignedInteger for i8, i16, i32, i64, isize; // currently not ok
impl SignedInteger for i8, i16, i32, i64, isize {} // currently not ok
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 reviewing the issue's proposed empty-trait and multi-type implementation syntax in the Rust RFC repository. Determine the language-design and RFC scope needed for these forms; the work is done when the proposal has a resolved design and an accepted RFC.
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
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100