Tracking Issue for `range_bounds_is_empty`
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
C-tracking-issue
S-tracking-design-concerns
T-libs
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 119k
- Forks
- 16.2k
- PR merge metrics
- PR metrics pending
Description
Feature gate: #![feature(range_bounds_is_empty)]
This is a tracking issue for the is_empty method on RangeBounds.
Public API
// core::ops
pub trait RangeBounds<T: ?Sized> {
...
fn is_empty(&self) -> bool
where
T: PartialOrd,
{
...
}
}
Steps / History
- ACP: https://github.com/rust-lang/libs-team/issues/539
- Implementation: #137304
- Final comment period (FCP)^1
- Stabilization PR
Unresolved Questions
(Excluded(1), Excluded(2))is considered to be non-empty. This could be a foot gun. Should we add a trait bound to avoid it? Related issues:
Contributor guide
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 RangeBounds::is_empty public API, the implementation in #137304, and the unresolved question about excluded bounds. Follow the linked ACP and feature lifecycle guidance for the final comment period and stabilization PR; done means the open design concern is resolved and stabilization is completed.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- backend-api-design
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100