rustfmt thinks that a pattern matching is a closure
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
A-matches
I-poor-formatting
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 7k
- Forks
- 1.1k
- Avg merge
- 2d 13h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 24
Description
When formatting this code:
fn is_something(foo: Foo, bar: Bar) -> bool {
matches!((legacy_required_finality, signature_weight),
| (LegacyRequiredFinality::Any, Insufficient | Weak | Strict)
| (LegacyRequiredFinality::Weak, Weak | Strict)
| (LegacyRequiredFinality::Strict, Strict)
)
}
It is written like that:
fn is_something(foo: Foo, bar: Bar) -> bool {
matches!((legacy_required_finality, signature_weight), |(
LegacyRequiredFinality::Any,
Insufficient | Weak | Strict,
)| (
LegacyRequiredFinality::Weak,
Weak | Strict
) | (
LegacyRequiredFinality::Strict,
Strict
))
}
I think that rustfmt sees it as a closure.
I tried to reproduce with a simpler example, but it doesn't work. I think it comes from diverse things, like the fact there is a tuple.
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
No source file or test is named. Start by running rustfmt on the two Rust snippets from the issue and compare the formatting, then trace the handling of the matches! macro's tuple patterns and closure-like syntax; done means the pattern is formatted as shown in the first snippet without regressing related formatting.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- tooling
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 38/100