-
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
Open ranges in pattern matching #947
Comments
nrc
added
the
postponed
RFCs that have been postponed and may be revisited at a later time.
label
Mar 6, 2015
petrochenkov
added
the
T-lang
Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the RFC.
label
Jan 29, 2018
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this issue
Jan 9, 2020
Introduce `X..`, `..X`, and `..=X` range patterns Tracking issue: rust-lang#67264 Feature gate: `#![feature(half_open_range_patterns)]` --------------------------- In this PR, we introduce range-from (`X..`), range-to (`..X`), and range-to-inclusive (`..=X`) patterns. These correspond to the `RangeFrom`, `RangeTo`, and `RangeToInclusive` expression forms introduced with the same syntaxes. The correspondence is both syntactic and semantic (in the sense that e.g. a `X..` pattern matching on a scrutinee `s` holds exactly when `(X..).contains(&s)` holds). --------------------------- Noteworthy: - The compiler complexity added with this PR is around 10 lines (discounting new tests, which account for the large PR size). - `...X` is accepted syntactically with the same meaning as `..=X`. This is done primarily to simplify and unify the implementation & spec. If-and-when we decide to make `X...Y` a hard error on a new edition, we can do the same for `...X` patterns as well. - `X...` and `X..=` is rejected syntactically just like it is for the expression equivalents. We should perhaps make these into semantic restrictions (cc @petrochenkov). - In HAIR, these half-open ranges are represented by inserting the max/min values for the approprate types. That is, `X..` where `X: u8` would become `X..=u8::MAX` in HAIR (note the `..=` since `RangeFrom` includes the end). - Exhaustive integer / char matching does not (yet) allow for e.g. exhaustive matching on `0usize..` or `..5usize | 5..` (same idea for `isize`). This would be a substantially more invasive change, and could be added in some other PR. - The issues with slice pattern syntax has been resolved as we decided to use `..` to mean a "rest-pattern" and `[xs @ ..]` to bind the rest to a name in a slice pattern. - Like with rust-lang#35712, which provided `X..Y` range patterns, this is not yet backed up by an RFC. I'm providing this experimental implementation now to have something concrete to discuss. I would be happy to provide an RFC for this PR as well as for rust-lang#35712 to finalize and confirm the ideas with the larger community. Closes rust-lang/rfcs#947. --------------------------- r? @varkor cc @matthewjasper @oli-obk I would recommend reviewing this (in particular HAIR-lowering and pattern parsing changes) with whitespace changes ignored.
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this issue
Jan 10, 2020
Introduce `X..`, `..X`, and `..=X` range patterns Tracking issue: rust-lang#67264 Feature gate: `#![feature(half_open_range_patterns)]` --------------------------- In this PR, we introduce range-from (`X..`), range-to (`..X`), and range-to-inclusive (`..=X`) patterns. These correspond to the `RangeFrom`, `RangeTo`, and `RangeToInclusive` expression forms introduced with the same syntaxes. The correspondence is both syntactic and semantic (in the sense that e.g. a `X..` pattern matching on a scrutinee `s` holds exactly when `(X..).contains(&s)` holds). --------------------------- Noteworthy: - The compiler complexity added with this PR is around 10 lines (discounting new tests, which account for the large PR size). - `...X` is accepted syntactically with the same meaning as `..=X`. This is done primarily to simplify and unify the implementation & spec. If-and-when we decide to make `X...Y` a hard error on a new edition, we can do the same for `...X` patterns as well. - `X...` and `X..=` is rejected syntactically just like it is for the expression equivalents. We should perhaps make these into semantic restrictions (cc @petrochenkov). - In HAIR, these half-open ranges are represented by inserting the max/min values for the approprate types. That is, `X..` where `X: u8` would become `X..=u8::MAX` in HAIR (note the `..=` since `RangeFrom` includes the end). - Exhaustive integer / char matching does not (yet) allow for e.g. exhaustive matching on `0usize..` or `..5usize | 5..` (same idea for `isize`). This would be a substantially more invasive change, and could be added in some other PR. - The issues with slice pattern syntax has been resolved as we decided to use `..` to mean a "rest-pattern" and `[xs @ ..]` to bind the rest to a name in a slice pattern. - Like with rust-lang#35712, which provided `X..Y` range patterns, this is not yet backed up by an RFC. I'm providing this experimental implementation now to have something concrete to discuss. I would be happy to provide an RFC for this PR as well as for rust-lang#35712 to finalize and confirm the ideas with the larger community. Closes rust-lang/rfcs#947. --------------------------- r? @varkor cc @matthewjasper @oli-obk I would recommend reviewing this (in particular HAIR-lowering and pattern parsing changes) with whitespace changes ignored.
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this issue
Jan 10, 2020
Introduce `X..`, `..X`, and `..=X` range patterns Tracking issue: rust-lang#67264 Feature gate: `#![feature(half_open_range_patterns)]` --------------------------- In this PR, we introduce range-from (`X..`), range-to (`..X`), and range-to-inclusive (`..=X`) patterns. These correspond to the `RangeFrom`, `RangeTo`, and `RangeToInclusive` expression forms introduced with the same syntaxes. The correspondence is both syntactic and semantic (in the sense that e.g. a `X..` pattern matching on a scrutinee `s` holds exactly when `(X..).contains(&s)` holds). --------------------------- Noteworthy: - The compiler complexity added with this PR is around 10 lines (discounting new tests, which account for the large PR size). - `...X` is accepted syntactically with the same meaning as `..=X`. This is done primarily to simplify and unify the implementation & spec. If-and-when we decide to make `X...Y` a hard error on a new edition, we can do the same for `...X` patterns as well. - `X...` and `X..=` is rejected syntactically just like it is for the expression equivalents. We should perhaps make these into semantic restrictions (cc @petrochenkov). - In HAIR, these half-open ranges are represented by inserting the max/min values for the approprate types. That is, `X..` where `X: u8` would become `X..=u8::MAX` in HAIR (note the `..=` since `RangeFrom` includes the end). - Exhaustive integer / char matching does not (yet) allow for e.g. exhaustive matching on `0usize..` or `..5usize | 5..` (same idea for `isize`). This would be a substantially more invasive change, and could be added in some other PR. - The issues with slice pattern syntax has been resolved as we decided to use `..` to mean a "rest-pattern" and `[xs @ ..]` to bind the rest to a name in a slice pattern. - Like with rust-lang#35712, which provided `X..Y` range patterns, this is not yet backed up by an RFC. I'm providing this experimental implementation now to have something concrete to discuss. I would be happy to provide an RFC for this PR as well as for rust-lang#35712 to finalize and confirm the ideas with the larger community. Closes rust-lang/rfcs#947. --------------------------- r? @varkor cc @matthewjasper @oli-obk I would recommend reviewing this (in particular HAIR-lowering and pattern parsing changes) with whitespace changes ignored.
JohnTitor
added a commit
to JohnTitor/rust
that referenced
this issue
Jan 10, 2020
Introduce `X..`, `..X`, and `..=X` range patterns Tracking issue: rust-lang#67264 Feature gate: `#![feature(half_open_range_patterns)]` --------------------------- In this PR, we introduce range-from (`X..`), range-to (`..X`), and range-to-inclusive (`..=X`) patterns. These correspond to the `RangeFrom`, `RangeTo`, and `RangeToInclusive` expression forms introduced with the same syntaxes. The correspondence is both syntactic and semantic (in the sense that e.g. a `X..` pattern matching on a scrutinee `s` holds exactly when `(X..).contains(&s)` holds). --------------------------- Noteworthy: - The compiler complexity added with this PR is around 10 lines (discounting new tests, which account for the large PR size). - `...X` is accepted syntactically with the same meaning as `..=X`. This is done primarily to simplify and unify the implementation & spec. If-and-when we decide to make `X...Y` a hard error on a new edition, we can do the same for `...X` patterns as well. - `X...` and `X..=` is rejected syntactically just like it is for the expression equivalents. We should perhaps make these into semantic restrictions (cc @petrochenkov). - In HAIR, these half-open ranges are represented by inserting the max/min values for the approprate types. That is, `X..` where `X: u8` would become `X..=u8::MAX` in HAIR (note the `..=` since `RangeFrom` includes the end). - Exhaustive integer / char matching does not (yet) allow for e.g. exhaustive matching on `0usize..` or `..5usize | 5..` (same idea for `isize`). This would be a substantially more invasive change, and could be added in some other PR. - The issues with slice pattern syntax has been resolved as we decided to use `..` to mean a "rest-pattern" and `[xs @ ..]` to bind the rest to a name in a slice pattern. - Like with rust-lang#35712, which provided `X..Y` range patterns, this is not yet backed up by an RFC. I'm providing this experimental implementation now to have something concrete to discuss. I would be happy to provide an RFC for this PR as well as for rust-lang#35712 to finalize and confirm the ideas with the larger community. Closes rust-lang/rfcs#947. --------------------------- r? @varkor cc @matthewjasper @oli-obk I would recommend reviewing this (in particular HAIR-lowering and pattern parsing changes) with whitespace changes ignored.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Allow
...x
andy....
in matches. Proposed in #880.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: