5 ms·

I disagree. There's a clippy lint against pattern matching on bool. I also think Result has the connotation of "success or error". Plus it's always annoying whe

I disagree. There's a clippy lint against pattern matching on bool. I also think Result has the connotation of "success or error". Plus it's always annoying when a function returns an error that doesn't implement Error and I have to wrap/replace it to make it integrate with the standard error handling ecosystem. There's a nice alternative though, which is empty struct errors. #[derive(Debug, thiserror::Error, displays of::Display)] /// Frobnicating the foo failed. struct FrobError; The advantage is the standard advantages types use, i.e. if I want to propagate it I know this specific zero sized type has a specific meaning. It'll also show a nice message if you print it.

estebank 5y ago
I like matching on bools on the same cases where someone wouldn't write braces around the body in C: whenever the corresponding expressions keep you under the line length. For example: let plural = match cases.len() > 1 { true => "s", false => "", }; Of course, you'd more likely have something like let prefix = match cases.len() { 0 => "no values".to_string(), 1 => "a value".to_string(), n => format!("{} values", n), };
- iudqnolq 5y ago
  Interesting. I prefer writing that as an if/else on one line when rufmt lets me, but I see your point.
- rabidferret 5y ago
  let plural = match cases.len() { 1.. => "s", 0 => "", }; ;P
  - cyphar 5y ago
    That's not the correct plural rule in English, you'd want let plural = match cases.len() { 0 | 2.. => "s", 1 => "", }; or something (though to be fair the original code snippet also handled "0" incorrectly -- should be "cases.len() != 1").
    - iudqnolq 5y ago
      And also to be fair you probably don't want to be hardcoding English pluralization rules.
      - rabidferret 5y ago
        I used to maintain a library which actually tried to implement proper English pluralization rules. I can confirm you don't want to do that.
- spullara 5y ago
  My favorite thing about internationalization is that some languages have 6 different translations for different amounts.

estebank 5y ago

I like matching on bools on the same cases where someone wouldn't write braces around the body in C: whenever the corresponding expressions keep you under the line length. For example: let plural = match cases.len() > 1 { true => "s", false => "", }; Of course, you'd more likely have something like let prefix = match cases.len() { 0 => "no values".to_string(), 1 => "a value".to_string(), n => format!("{} values", n), };

iudqnolq 5y ago
Interesting. I prefer writing that as an if/else on one line when rufmt lets me, but I see your point.
rabidferret 5y ago
let plural = match cases.len() { 1.. => "s", 0 => "", }; ;P
- cyphar 5y ago
  That's not the correct plural rule in English, you'd want let plural = match cases.len() { 0 | 2.. => "s", 1 => "", }; or something (though to be fair the original code snippet also handled "0" incorrectly -- should be "cases.len() != 1").
  - iudqnolq 5y ago
    And also to be fair you probably don't want to be hardcoding English pluralization rules.
    - rabidferret 5y ago
      I used to maintain a library which actually tried to implement proper English pluralization rules. I can confirm you don't want to do that.
spullara 5y ago
My favorite thing about internationalization is that some languages have 6 different translations for different amounts.