-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.3k
Stabilize core::convert::identity #57322
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
Conversation
r+, pending FCP completion |
@@ -86,14 +84,13 @@ | |||
/// Using `identity` to keep the `Some` variants of an iterator of `Option<T>`: |
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 feel like this particularly would be better as flatten
with an explicit specialisation for Option
, rather than filter_map
.
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 disagree.
First, I think that .filter_map(identity)
is clearer wrt. intent (and also semantics). I can clearly tell that filtering is happening because it says so in the name. I know that .filter_map
takes f: T -> Option<U>
and with identity
I fix T = Option<U>
and thus I get back all the Some
s. The .flatten()
method doesn't tell me any of this, in particular you cannot tell without knowing that Option
is being operated on what the semantics are. Thus the reasoning footprint is greater with .flatten()
.
Second, even tho .flatten()
is more general than join :: Monad m => m (m a) -> m a
I think the primary use of the method should be for monadic join and using it for other purposes will break some people's minds (e.g. mine).
Third, I think that we shouldn't hold up stabilization on this issue; we can resolve it in a subsequent PR or issue if you feel strongly.
FCP has completed, and therefore: @bors r=SimonSapin p=1 |
📌 Commit e75dab7 has been approved by |
Stabilize core::convert::identity r? @SimonSapin fixes #53500 This is waiting for FCP to complete but in the interim it would be good to review.
☀️ Test successful - checks-travis, status-appveyor |
r? @SimonSapin
fixes #53500
This is waiting for FCP to complete but in the interim it would be good to review.