-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
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
[RFC2603] Extend <const>
to include str
and structural constants.
#3161
Open
eddyb
wants to merge
2
commits into
rust-lang:master
Choose a base branch
from
eddyb:value-mangling
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and old review comments may become outdated.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
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 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I'm not sure why
U
is necessary,UnitStruct
andUnitStruct {}
are the same constant, soU
can beS {} E
, the only benefit is slight compression.I'm also not sure why identifiers for field names are necessary, fields are uniquely identifiable by their indices, so
"S" {<const>} "E"
should work equally well?In other words,
"S" {<const>} "E"
appears to be usable for any structs and variants.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.
We could also "just" flatten the constant and only put the leaf values in, we wouldn't need any names or tuple/array distinctions and nesting.
The only reason we tell apart any of these things is being able to recover useful syntax for the users, and I somewhat assumed that to be a given, I suppose.
I'm obviously biased towards the approach I implemented, but maybe you could register a concern with rfcbot, that could get discussed by compiler team? (though I'm not sure in what kind of meeting)
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.
Done.
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.
I would say we keep the
U
just in order to make it consistent: we already encode()
asu
where we could also encode it as an empty tupleTE
.