3 ms·
I suppose it can get a little silly when you mix closures without arguments and the logical 'or' operator', e.g.: // prints 'true' println!("{}", true|
by Thiez 10y ago
I suppose it can get a little silly when you mix closures without arguments and the logical 'or' operator', e.g.:
// prints 'true'
println!("{}", true||(||true)()||(||true)());
Of course you wouldn't actually do this unless you're being intentionally obscure. Another favorite of mine:
// prints '()'
println!("{:?}", (||||||||||())()()()()());
But I can't recall ever running into such silly code, in practice the closure syntax and logical or do not lead to confusion (imho, ymmv).
- MoSal 10y ago> in practice the closure syntax and logical or do not lead to confusion (imho, ymmv). That's true. But put your self in the mind of a C developer looking at Rust code for the first time: if a || b { println!("True"); } Cool. Then: thread::spawn(|| println!("Hello from a thread!");); What? What is the logical or doing there? ---- IIRC, there are also cases where you have to write `& &` instead of `&&` to not confuse the compiler. That's a design/practical issue. Both those issues would have been avoided if literal `and`/`or` were used. I find it interesting how the only thing that momentarily confused me, as a C developer, about Rust syntax, was caused by Rust authors not wanting to syntactically deviate too much from C.