Address * with trailing commas

mark-i-m · web-flow · commit b534c4de7982 · 2018-02-11T12:51:15.000-06:00
diff --git a/text/0000-macro-at-most-once-rep.md b/text/0000-macro-at-most-once-rep.md
@@ -47,8 +47,8 @@ Currently, the best way to make a rule tolerate trailing commas is to create ano
 
 ```rust
 macro_rules! foo {
-  ($(pat),*,) => { foo!( $(pat),* ) };
-  ($(pat),*) => {
+  ($(pat),+,) => { foo!( $(pat),+ ) };
+  ($(pat),+) => {
     // do stuff
   }
 }
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ or to allow multiple trailing commas:
 
 ```rust
 macro_rules! foo {
-  ($(pat),* $(,)*) => {
+  ($(pat),+ $(,)*) => {
     // do stuff
   }
 }
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ This is unergonomic and clutters up macro definitions needlessly. Under this RFC
 
 ```rust
 macro_rules! foo {
-  ($(pat),* $(,)?) => {
+  ($(pat),+ $(,)?) => {
     // do stuff
   }
 }
@@ -132,6 +132,8 @@ Drawbacks
 ---------
 While there are grammar ambiguities, they can be easily fixed.
 
+Also, for patterns that use `*`, `?` is not a perfect solution: `$(pat),* $(,)?` still allows `,` which is a bit weird. However, this is still an improvement over `$(pat),* $(,)*` which allows `,,,,,`.
+
 Rationale and Alternatives
 --------------------------
 

Original file line number	Diff line number	Diff line change
`@@ -47,8 +47,8 @@ Currently, the best way to make a rule tolerate trailing commas is to create ano`
`47`	`47`
`48`	`48`	```rust
`49`	`49`	`macro_rules! foo {`
`50`		`- ($(pat),,) => { foo!( $(pat), ) };`
`51`		`- ($(pat),*) => {`
	`50`	`+ ($(pat),+,) => { foo!( $(pat),+ ) };`
	`51`	`+ ($(pat),+) => {`
`52`	`52`	`// do stuff`
`53`	`53`	`}`
`54`	`54`	`}`
`@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ or to allow multiple trailing commas:`
`58`	`58`
`59`	`59`	```rust
`60`	`60`	`macro_rules! foo {`
`61`		`- ($(pat),* $(,)*) => {`
	`61`	`+ ($(pat),+ $(,)*) => {`
`62`	`62`	`// do stuff`
`63`	`63`	`}`
`64`	`64`	`}`
`@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ This is unergonomic and clutters up macro definitions needlessly. Under this RFC`
`68`	`68`
`69`	`69`	```rust
`70`	`70`	`macro_rules! foo {`
`71`		`- ($(pat),* $(,)?) => {`
	`71`	`+ ($(pat),+ $(,)?) => {`
`72`	`72`	`// do stuff`
`73`	`73`	`}`
`74`	`74`	`}`
`@@ -132,6 +132,8 @@ Drawbacks`
`132`	`132`	`---------`
`133`	`133`	`While there are grammar ambiguities, they can be easily fixed.`
`134`	`134`
	`135`	+Also, for patterns that use ``, `?` is not a perfect solution: `$(pat), $(,)?` still allows `,` which is a bit weird. However, this is still an improvement over `$(pat),* $(,)*` which allows `,,,,,`.
	`136`	`+`
`135`	`137`	`Rationale and Alternatives`
`136`	`138`	`--------------------------`
`137`	`139`