-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 540
specify if let
guards with updated scoping rules
#1957
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
dianne
wants to merge
5
commits into
rust-lang:master
Choose a base branch
from
dianne:if-let-guard
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
483902e
added documentation for if let
Kivooeo 8ce1dc6
cutted down match-expr, added info in destructors, fixed syntax, remo…
Kivooeo 2a39499
Rework match guard chain
ehuss 915a3ea
rework scoping rules for match arms and guards
dianne 6f1597a
editorial tweaks
dianne File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To address #1823 (comment) (cc @theemathas), the temporary lifetime of an
if let
guard scrutinee is always extended, like forif let
expressions. There aren't lifetime extension rules like there are forlet
statements. This rule should hopefully cover that (similar to how the analogous rule for "The pattern-matching condition(s) and consequent body ofif
" does below). There's an example further down too showing that the scrutinee lives until the end of the arm. Do you think this is sufficient, or would this benefit from additional clarification?This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, are you saying that both the guard and the body expression together count as a single temporary scope (and not two)? I find that unintuitive, but I suppose that works.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There's a single temporary scope for the arm, which encompasses the guard and body expression, so that
if let
scrutinees' temporaries live through the body, yes;if let
scrutinees aren't temporary destruction scopes by default. Maybe it would be clearer to phrase the temporary scope as being as for the whole arm, with a clarifying note that it includes the guard. Something like "* The arm of amatch
expression. This includes the arm's guard, if present."Personally, I'd like stricter scoping rules for
if let
, but this is consistent withif let
/while let
expressions. Making their scrutinees be temporary drop scopes by default with lifetime extension rules (likelet
statements have) would be a larger change requiring an edition break.