Skip to content
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

RFC: Finalize syntax for slice patterns with subslices #2359

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jun 30, 2019

Conversation

petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

@petrochenkov petrochenkov commented Mar 9, 2018

Use an obvious syntax for subslices in slice patterns - .. and ..PAT.
If syntactic ambiguities arise in the future, always disambiguate in favor of subslice patterns.

Use syntax .. for "wildcard" sub-slice patterns and IDENT @ .. for binding subslice pattern to a name.

Rendered
Tracking issue

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

cc rust-lang/rust#23121

@SoniEx2
Copy link

SoniEx2 commented Mar 9, 2018

Why not use the existing @ syntax?

name @ or just @.

_ gives an item, an empty spot gives any items.

@Centril Centril added the T-lang Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the RFC. label Mar 9, 2018
@jethrogb
Copy link
Contributor

jethrogb commented Mar 9, 2018

I also like PAT @ ..

@clarfonthey
Copy link
Contributor

clarfonthey commented Mar 9, 2018

IMO if someone has a slice of ranges, forcing them to use the structs themselves (e.g. [RangeFull]) is a reasonable compromise. There can even be a clippy lint for it. Personally, I'd rather have [a..b, ..] mean "a slice with at least one element where the first is a number between a and b", rather than "slices can't have different types in them."

@SimonSapin
Copy link
Contributor

And RangeFull only has one value, so a _ pattern can also be used.

@kennytm
Copy link
Member

kennytm commented Mar 9, 2018

To clarify, by RangeFull I mean RangeFull.contains(), not a literal RangeFull instance 😄

match x {
    5..=8 => a,
    9..12 => b,
    12.. => c,
    ..3 => d,
    .. => e,
}

is equivalent to

match x {
    y if (5..=8).contains(y) => a,
    y if (9..12).contains(y) => b,
    y if (12..).contains(y) => c,
    y if (..3).contains(y) => d,
    y if (..).contains(y) => e,
}

Now for sure only a and b are supported at the moment, and c and d are not supported, and making .. mean RangeFull would have ambiguity with

match (x, y, z) {
    (a, ..) => {}
}

(Also note that the RangeFull::contains method does not really exist.)

@SimonSapin
Copy link
Contributor

@kennytm Oh ok, so range patterns, not the RangeFull type. That’s also equivalent to a _ pattern, isn’t it?

@kennytm
Copy link
Member

kennytm commented Mar 9, 2018

@SimonSapin yes, but may require PartialOrd. Anyway I don't think we'll ever support .. as a range pattern. I just wanna say that ..PAT or PAT..'s ambiguity with a range pattern isn't unique.

@arielb1
Copy link
Contributor

arielb1 commented Mar 14, 2018

I don't see why we would ever want to implement full range patterns - they are the same as a _-pattern.

OTOH, partial range patterns look like a useful enough feature, so I would prefer not to force us to make an ugly syntax change in a future epoch if we ever want to support them

I don't like the BINDING @ PAT syntax much, but it is not infinitely ugly, consistent with what we have today, and it prevents a few annoying specification questions about patterns such as [w, ..[x, y], z] (these work under the current implementation, but thinking of it, I probably should have made them an error instead of making them work).

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

petrochenkov commented Apr 7, 2018

@jethrogb

I also like PAT @ ..

Why?

  • It adds an extra sigil unnecessary in 99% cases (in 100% with the current language). It also can lead to double @ if the pattern itself contains it (ident @ PAT @ ..?).
  • It's not consistent with any existing syntax. We have ident @ PAT, but it has the pattern on the right side, so it's rather "confusingly similar" so people writing code by analogy may write a wrong thing.
  • It's not symmetric with "rest of the list" in expressions.

@SoniEx2
Copy link

SoniEx2 commented Apr 7, 2018

I think ppl misunderstood when I said binding-at, they thought I meant binding-at-dot-dot. I meant binding-at, no dot-dot.

[a, b, c@] not [a, b, c@..].

This is about as verbose as ..x but it's actually less verbose because one less character. (And it's more obvious because it resembles binding@pat, not ranges.)

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

@SoniEx2
I see. PAT @ /* nothing */ looks unambiguous indeed.
I don't see where this syntax comes from though, how it relates to subslices or "rest of the list".
It looks kinda random to me like PAT >, or PAT ~, or PAT any_other_unrelated_symbol.

@SoniEx2
Copy link

SoniEx2 commented Apr 7, 2018

PAT @ /*nothing*/? I thought it was supposed to be binding @ /*nothing*/?

I thought we had binding @ thing as it currently stands, e.g. I can do

match x {
    binding @ 1..10 => {},
    _ => {}
}

But are you telling me it's actually pat @ thing and not binding @ thing? Anyway the idea was to omit thing, that's where it comes from.

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

petrochenkov commented Apr 7, 2018

@SoniEx2

I thought we had binding @ thing as it currently stands

Exactly, we have binding @ PATTERN_THING on stable.
And in slice patterns we also have [a, PATTERN_THING.., b] on nightly for which this RFC tries to find a replacement for stabilization.

@SoniEx2
Copy link

SoniEx2 commented Apr 7, 2018

remove PATTERN_THING.

idk why the hell PATTERN_THING.. is a thing, even the person who made that says it was a mistake and should have been binding.. instead.

so just take binding @ PATTENR_THING, and drop the PATTERN_THING, and treat dropping the PATTERN_THING as a "slice patterns" thing.

[a, binding@, b].

and the clippy lint should recommend no space between binding and @ for slice patterns.

and this is a trivial variation of already existing things.

if you want PATTERN_THING@ in slice patterns, give us PATTERN_THING @ PATTERN_THING everywhere.

@jethrogb
Copy link
Contributor

jethrogb commented Apr 9, 2018

@petrochenkov

I also like PAT @ ..

Why?

  • It adds an extra sigil unnecessary in 99% cases (in 100% with the current language). It also can lead to double @ if the pattern itself contains it (ident @ PAT @ ..?).
  • It's not consistent with any existing syntax. We have ident @ PAT, but it has the pattern on the right side, so it's rather "confusingly similar" so people writing code by analogy may write a wrong thing.
  • It's not symmetric with "rest of the list" in expressions.

My bad, I meant ident @ .., not PAT @ ... The current RFC text calls it PAT but shows only identifier usage. I thought .. is the pattern in this case. Can you explain why you need a pattern in this position?

@nikomatsakis
Copy link
Contributor

I'm trying to get my head caught up. To summarize current debate:

There are two cases to consider:

  • [a, .., c] -- match any number of elements (and ignore)
  • [a, ..b, c] -- extract inner elements as a slice (or subarray, etc)

This syntax is indeed fairly obvious. However, it conflicts with a possible future extension of open-ended ranges like ..5, which might mean the same as 0..5. (And indeed one can write &foo[..x] today.)

There have been various alternatives floated. I think the primary one is the @ operator, like so:

  • [a, .., c]
  • [a, b @ .., c]

As @arielb1 pointed out, making .. a valid pattern is unlikely, since it would be equivalent to _. @petrochenkov points out that it could be considered unnecessary verbose for the common case. There is (to my eyes) a certain consistency, though, since .. refers to "the stuff in the middle" and @ is typically used to give a name to stuff that would have been matched (even though .. here is not, strictly speaking, a pattern).

Also proposed was to just say "nothing", I think. Not sure what was meant entirely, could have been this:

  • [a, , c]
  • [a, b @, c]

Does this sound like a fairly complete summary? It seems like we're at the point where we effectively have to make a judgement call.

@SoniEx2
Copy link

SoniEx2 commented Apr 26, 2018

I suggested "nothing" in the sense of:

  • [a, @, c]
  • [a, b@, c]

The @ would still exist in the no-binding case only for the sake of catching typos ([a,, c] when you meant [a, c]). Accidentally forgetting to add the @ (in the case of b@) is also something to consider, but arguably less likely to happen in practice.

Alternatively, do some A/B testing:

  1. Make nightly use @ and b @. Leave it in for a few nightlies, gather feedback on it.
  2. Switch to `` (empty) and b @. Leave it in for a few nightlies, gather feedback on it.
  3. Switch to .. and b ... Leave it in for a few nightlies, gather feedback on it.
  4. Switch to .. and b @ ... Leave it in for a few nightlies, gather feedback on it.

(We should do more of this btw. I know it intentionally breaks code, but is probably the easiest/fastest way to gather feedback on it. Also, it's nightly, don't expect nightly to be stable.)

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

petrochenkov commented Apr 26, 2018

@jethrogb

Can you explain why you need a pattern in this position?

This is a legitimate question.
My first reaction is that supporting arbitrary patterns in this position is status quo, it's already implemented and we'd have to change the implementation to specifically prohibit them.

Regarding the actual motivation, we need to support at least two kinds of patterns:

  • bindings (..x, ..ref x, ..mut x, ..ref mut x). Note that currently if ref x is supported in some position, then arbitrary patterns are supported in it as well, so prohibiting them in sub-slices would create an exception,
  • wildcard _, because .. means .._

, so it's kinda reasonable to support remaining patterns as well.

From all the remaining pattern kinds only inner slice patterns (..[inner, slice, patterns]), array constant patterns (..ARRAY_CONST) and parentheses (..([A, B, B])) can be used in this position without type errors, including forms with bindings (..whole_subslice @ [A, B, C]).
I do agree that these are probably rarely needed, but maybe people can come up with some examples when they are useful?
I suspect something like whole_slice_binding @ [first_elem_binding, ..] would be the most useful, except that this case (and patterns with bindings on both sides in general) is not supported by borrow checker yet. (But they certainly may be supported in the future!)

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jethrogb

The current RFC text calls it PAT but shows only identifier usage.

Yeah, examples with non-binding patterns are certainly something that needs to be included in the RFC, at least from what I see in the discussion thread the lack of such examples caused enough confusion.

@SoniEx2
Copy link

SoniEx2 commented Apr 26, 2018

any thoughts on A/B-testing language changes?

@jethrogb
Copy link
Contributor

jethrogb commented Apr 26, 2018

@petrochenkov

Note that currently if ref x is supported in some position, then arbitrary patterns are supported in it as well, so prohibiting them in sub-slices would create an exception,

Either I don't understand what you're saying, or that's not actually the case. Example:

fn main() {
    let a = (1, 2);
    let ref s @ _ = a; // ok
    let (ref s, _) @ _ = a; // error: expected one of `:`, `;`, or `=`, found `@`
}

How is this behavior different from what I'm proposing for subslice bindings?

From all the remaining pattern kinds only inner slice patterns (..[inner, slice, patterns]), array constant patterns (..ARRAY_CONST) and parentheses (..([A, B, B])) can be used in this position without type errors

These could all be expanded in-place and then you don't need a subslice pattern, correct?

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jethrogb

let ref s @ _ = a; // ok
let (ref s, _) @ _ = a; // error: expected one of `:`, `;`, or `=`, found `@`

Well, yes, except for this case.
What I really meant is that "if ref x @ _ (i.e. ref x desugared) is supported in some position, then arbitrary patterns are supported in it as well".

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

petrochenkov commented Apr 29, 2018

@jethrogb

These could all be expanded in-place and then you don't need a subslice pattern, correct?

Yes, constants and parentheses are pretty useless and can be "inlined".

As I said, something like ..ref ident @ [_] would be the most realistically useful application for patterns in this position, when you wan't to match a specific subslice (e.g. with one element), but at the same time give a name to this subslice. This case cannot be "inlined".
(With PAT @ .. syntax it would look like ref ident @ [_] @ ...)

@bstrie
Copy link
Contributor

bstrie commented May 13, 2018

Three things:

  1. If we're being forward-thinking enough to consider the syntax for open-ended range patterns in the pattern grammar, then we should also consider that patterns are intended to reflect construction, which means that any syntax that we design here is eventually going to have people asking for its use in non-pattern contexts as well. In other words, once this feature is stable I guarantee that people are going to want to be able to do e.g. let x = [2, 3, 4]; let y = [1, ..x, 5]; assert!([1,2,3,4,5]==y);. This isn't a semantic stretch, either; in Python this is called "unpacking", and x = [2, 3, 4]; y = [1, *x, 5] is completely legal. And of course, let x = [..y]; would be illegal in Rust because ranges already use that syntax. It's unfortunate that Foo {x, ..y} is today the closest thing we have to "unpacking" syntax, because it means we're already boxed into a corner; either we decide never to support unpacking, or we accept that the syntax is going to have to be inconsistent somewhere.

  2. Changing tack, given that [1, foo @ _, 3] (intentional underscore) is a completely legal pattern today, I submit that [1, foo @ .., 3] should be made to Just Work; in other words, we lift the arbitrary restriction on the .. pattern that today prevents tuple patterns from being able to say (1, foo @ .., 2) (the restriction can remain for struct patterns, because nominal types). This should happen regardless of if we also want to have a dedicated syntax for subslice patterns, in the same way that [1, foo @ _, 3] works despite the fact that we have dedicated syntax for that of the form [1, foo, 3]. By that point of view, not only does this make the foo @ .. proposal look like the most conservative path forward, it also allows us to completely punt on what unpacking syntax might look like, sidestepping any collateral bikeshedding. Consider my vote in favor of foo @ ..; though I admit at first I wasn't a fan, it really does seem like the most sensible option -- and more importantly, it's forward-compatible with later coming up with alternative syntax without seeming like redundancy (it's a natural extension of @, after all). And who knows, maybe people will actually stop being afraid of the @ pattern if we make it more common. :P

  3. Although I hope that the above is convincing enough, if we really must have dedicated syntax for this then I submit ..ident.., as in [foo, ..bar.., qux], since it at least preserves some similarity to the existing "skip multiple things" syntax, and when people start asking for an unpacking RFC it wouldn't be so dissimilar from the functional struct update syntax that it would give me conniptions. :) That said, this is also a discussion that we could fully leave for the future if we implement my suggestion in the prior paragraph.

@SoniEx2
Copy link

SoniEx2 commented May 14, 2018

And who knows, maybe people will actually stop being afraid of the @ pattern if we make it more common. :P

I'd like to plug #2272 and rust-lang/rust-clippy#2378. We should make ppl afraid of non-@ patterns instead.

@Centril
Copy link
Contributor

Centril commented Jun 7, 2019

N.B. I have checked Aaron's box as they are on leave.

text/0000-subslice-pattern-syntax.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
text/0000-subslice-pattern-syntax.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
text/0000-subslice-pattern-syntax.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@rfcbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rfcbot commented Jun 20, 2019

🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔

@rfcbot rfcbot added final-comment-period Will be merged/postponed/closed in ~10 calendar days unless new substational objections are raised. and removed proposed-final-comment-period Currently awaiting signoff of all team members in order to enter the final comment period. labels Jun 20, 2019
@rfcbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rfcbot commented Jun 30, 2019

The final comment period, with a disposition to merge, as per the review above, is now complete.

As the automated representative of the governance process, I would like to thank the author for their work and everyone else who contributed.

The RFC will be merged soon.

@rfcbot rfcbot added finished-final-comment-period The final comment period is finished for this RFC. and removed final-comment-period Will be merged/postponed/closed in ~10 calendar days unless new substational objections are raised. labels Jun 30, 2019
@Centril Centril merged commit 60b973a into rust-lang:master Jun 30, 2019
@Centril
Copy link
Contributor

Centril commented Jun 30, 2019

🎉 Huzzah! This RFC has been merged! 🎉

Tracking issue: rust-lang/rust#62254

@petrochenkov petrochenkov deleted the subsl branch July 1, 2019 22:57
tmandry added a commit to tmandry/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2020
…=matthewjasper

Stabilize `#![feature(slice_patterns)]` in 1.42.0

# Stabilization report

The following is the stabilization report for `#![feature(slice_patterns)]`.
This report is the collaborative effort of @matthewjasper and @Centril.

Tracking issue: rust-lang#62254
[Version target](https://forge.rust-lang.org/#current-release-versions): 1.42 (2020-01-30 => beta, 2020-03-12 => stable).

## Backstory: slice patterns

It is already possible to use slice patterns on stable Rust to match on arrays and slices. For example, to match on a slice, you may write:

```rust
fn foo(slice: &[&str]) {
    match slice {
        [] => { dbg!() }
        [a] => { dbg!(a); }
        [a, b] => { dbg!(a, b); }
        _ => {}
    //  ^ Fallback -- necessary because the length is unknown!
    }
}
```

To match on an array, you may instead write:

```rust
fn bar([a, b, c]: [u8; 3]) {}
//     --------- Length is known, so pattern is irrefutable.
```

However, on stable Rust, it is not yet possible to match on a subslice or subarray.

## A quick user guide: Subslice patterns

The ability to match on a subslice or subarray is gated under `#![feature(slice_patterns)]` and is what is proposed for stabilization here.

### The syntax of subslice patterns

Subslice / subarray patterns come in two flavors syntactically.

Common to both flavors is they use the token `..`, referred as a *"rest pattern"* in a pattern context. This rest pattern functions as a variable-length pattern, matching whatever amount of elements that haven't been matched already before and after.

When `..` is used syntactically as an element of a slice-pattern, either directly (1), or as part of a binding pattern (2), it becomes a subslice pattern.

On stable Rust, a rest pattern `..` can also be used in a tuple or tuple-struct pattern with `let (x, ..) = (1, 2, 3);` and `let TS(x, ..) = TS(1, 2, 3);` respectively.

### (1) Matching on a subslice without binding it

```rust
fn base(string: &str) -> u8 {
    match string.as_bytes() {
        [b'0', b'x', ..] => 16,
        [b'0', b'o', ..] => 8,
        [b'0', b'b', ..] => 2,
        _ => 10,
    }
}

fn main() {
    assert_eq!(base("0xFF"), 16);
    assert_eq!(base("0x"), 16);
}
```

In the function `base`, the pattern `[b'0', b'x', ..]` will match on any byte-string slice with the *prefix* `0x`. Note that `..` may match on nothing, so `0x` is a valid match.

### (2) Binding a subslice:

```rust
fn main() {
    #[derive(PartialEq, Debug)]
    struct X(u8);
    let xs: Vec<X> = vec![X(0), X(1), X(2)];

    if let [start @ .., end] = &*xs {
        //              --- bind on last element, assuming there is one.
        //  ---------- bind the initial elements, if there are any.
        assert_eq!(start, &[X(0), X(1)] as &[X]);
        assert_eq!(end, &X(2));
        let _: &[X] = start;
        let _: &X = end;
    }
}
```

In this case, `[start @ .., end]`  will match any non-empty slice, binding the last element to `end` and any elements before that to `start`. Note in particular that, as above, `start` may match on the empty slice.

### Only one `..` per slice pattern

In today's stable Rust, a tuple (struct) pattern `(a, b, c)` can only have one subtuple pattern (e.g., `(a, .., c)`). That is, if there is a rest pattern, it may only occur once. Any `..` that follow, as in e.g., `(a, .., b, ..)` will cause an error, as there is no way for the compiler to know what `b` applies to. This rule also applies to slice patterns. That is, you may also not write `[a, .., b, ..]`.

## Motivation

[PR rust-lang#67569]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/67569/files

Slice patterns provide a natural and efficient way to pattern match on slices and arrays. This is particularly useful as slices and arrays are quite a common occurence in modern software targeting modern hardware. However, as aforementioned, it's not yet possible to perform incomplete matches, which is seen in `fn base`, an example taken from the `rustc` codebase itself. This is where subslice patterns come in and extend slice patterns with the natural syntax `xs @ ..` and `..`, where the latter is already used for tuples and tuple structs. As an example of how subslice patterns can be used to clean up code, we have [PR rust-lang#67569]. In this PR, slice patterns enabled us to improve readability and reduce unsafety, at no loss to performance.

## Technical specification

### Grammar

The following specification is a *sub-set* of the grammar necessary to explain what interests us here. Note that stabilizing subslice patterns does not alter the stable grammar. The stabilization contains purely semantic changes.

```rust
Binding = reference:"ref"? mutable:"mut"? name:IDENT;

Pat =
  | ... // elided
  | Rest: ".."
  | Binding:{ binding:Binding { "@" subpat:Pat }? }
  | Slice:{ "[" elems:Pat* %% "," "]" }
  | Paren:{ "(" pat:Pat ")" }
  | Tuple:{ path:Path? "(" elems:Pat* &% "," ")" }
  ;
```

Notes:

1. `(..)` is interpreted as a `Tuple`, not a `Paren`.
   This means that `[a, (..)]` is interpreted as `Slice[Binding(a), Tuple[Rest]]` and not `Slice[Binding(a), Paren(Rest)]`.

### Name resolution

[resolve_pattern_inner]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_resolve/late/struct.LateResolutionVisitor.html#method.resolve_pattern_inner
[product context]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_resolve/late/enum.PatBoundCtx.html#variant.Product

A slice pattern is [resolved][resolve_pattern_inner] as a [product context] and `..` is given no special treatment.

### Abstract syntax of slice patterns

The abstract syntax (HIR level) is defined like so:

```rust
enum PatKind {
    ... // Other unimportant stuff.
    Wild,
    Binding {
        binding: Binding,
        subpat: Option<Pat>,
    },
    Slice {
        before: List<Pat>,
        slice: Option<Pat>,
        after: List<Pat>,
    },
}
```

[`hir::PatKind`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc/hir/enum.PatKind.html

The executable definition is found in [`hir::PatKind`].

### Lowering to abstract syntax

Lowering a slice pattern to its abstract syntax proceeds by:

1. Lowering each element pattern of the slice pattern, where:

    1. `..` is lowered to `_`,
       recording that it was a subslice pattern,

    2. `binding @ ..` is lowered to `binding @ _`,
       recording that it was a subslice pattern,

    3. and all other patterns are lowered as normal,
       recording that it was not a subslice pattern.

2. Taking all lowered elements until the first subslice pattern.

3. Take all following elements.

   If there are any,

      1. The head is the sub-`slice` pattern.
      2. The tail (`after`) must not contain a subslice pattern,
         or an error occurs.

[`LoweringContext::lower_pat_slice`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc/hir/lowering/struct.LoweringContext.html#method.lower_pat_slice

The full executable definition can be found in [`LoweringContext::lower_pat_slice`].

### Type checking slice patterns

#### Default binding modes

[non-reference pattern]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/reference/patterns.html#binding-modes
[`is_non_ref_pat`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_typeck/check/struct.FnCtxt.html#method.is_non_ref_pat
[peel_off_references]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_typeck/check/struct.FnCtxt.html#method.peel_off_references

A slice pattern is a [non-reference pattern] as defined in [`is_non_ref_pat`]. This means that when type checking a slice pattern, as many immediate reference types are [peeled off][peel_off_references] from the `expected` type as possible and the default binding mode is adjusted to by-reference before checking the slice pattern. See rust-lang#63118 for an algorithmic description.

[RFC 2359]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2359-subslice-pattern-syntax.md

[rfc-2359-gle]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2359-subslice-pattern-syntax.md#guide-level-explanation

See [RFC 2359]'s [guide-level explanation][rfc-2359-gle] and the tests listed below for examples of what effect this has.

#### Checking the pattern

Type checking a slice pattern proceeds as follows:

1. Resolve any type variables by a single level.
   If the result still is a type variable, error.

2. Determine the expected type for any subslice pattern (`slice_ty`) and for elements (`inner_ty`) depending on the expected type.

   1. If the expected type is an array (`[E; N]`):

      1. Evaluate the length of the array.
         If the length couldn't be evaluated, error.
         This may occur when we have e.g., `const N: usize`.
         Now `N` is known.

      2. If there is no sub-`slice` pattern,
         check `len(before) == N`,
         and otherwise error.

      3. Otherwise,
         set `S = N - len(before) - len(after)`,
         and check `N >= 0` and otherwise error.
         Set `slice_ty = [E; S]`.

      Set `inner_ty = E`.

   2. If the expected type is a slice (`[E]`),
      set `inner_ty = E` and `slice_ty = [E]`.

   3. Otherwise, error.

3. Check each element in `before` and `after` against `inner_ty`.
4. If it exists, check `slice` against `slice_ty`.

[`check_pat_slice`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_typeck/check/struct.FnCtxt.html#method.check_pat_slice

For an executable definition, see [`check_pat_slice`].

### Typed abstract syntax of slice and array patterns

The typed abstract syntax (HAIR level) is defined like so:

```rust
enum PatKind {
    ... // Other unimportant stuff.
    Wild,
    Binding {
        ... // Elided.
    }
    Slice {
        prefix: List<Pat>,
        slice: Option<Pat>,
        suffix: List<Pat>,
    },
    Array {
        prefix: List<Pat>,
        slice: Option<Pat>,
        suffix: List<Pat>,
    },
}
```

[`hair::pattern::PatKind`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_mir/hair/pattern/enum.PatKind.html

The executable definition is found in [`hair::pattern::PatKind`].

### Lowering to typed abstract syntax

Lowering a slice pattern to its typed abstract syntax proceeds by:

1. Lowering each pattern in `before` into `prefix`.
2. Lowering the `slice`, if it exists, into `slice`.
   1. A `Wild` pattern in abstract syntax is lowered to `Wild`.
   2. A `Binding` pattern in abstract syntax is lowered to `Binding { .. }`.
3. Lowering each pattern in `after` into `after`.
4. If the type is `[E; N]`, construct `PatKind::Array { prefix, slice, after }`, otherwise `PatKind::Slice { prefix, slice, after }`.

[`PatCtxt::slice_or_array_pattern`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_mir/hair/pattern/struct.PatCtxt.html#method.slice_or_array_pattern

The executable definition is found in [`PatCtxt::slice_or_array_pattern`].

### Exhaustiveness checking

Let `E` be the element type of a slice or array.

- For array types, `[E; N]` with a known length `N`, the full set of constructors required for an exahustive match is the sequence `ctors(E)^N` where `ctors` denotes the constructors required for an exhaustive match of `E`.

- Otherwise, for slice types `[E]`, or for an array type with an unknown length `[E; ?L]`, the full set of constructors is the infinite sequence `⋃_i=0^∞ ctors(E)^i`. This entails that an exhaustive match without a cover-all pattern (e.g. `_` or `binding`) or a subslice pattern (e.g., `[..]` or `[_, _, ..]`) is impossible.

- `PatKind::{Slice, Array}(prefix, None, suffix @ [])` cover a sequence of of `len(prefix)` covered by `patterns`. Note that `suffix.len() > 0` with `slice == None` is unrepresentable.

- `PatKind::{Slice, Array}(prefix, Some(s), suffix)` cover a `sequence` with `prefix` as the start and `suffix` as the end and where `len(prefix) + len(suffix) <= len(sequence)`. The `..` in the middle is interpreted as an unbounded number of `_`s in terms of exhaustiveness checking.

### MIR representation

The relevant MIR representation for the lowering into MIR, which is discussed in the next section, includes:

```rust
enum Rvalue {
    // ...
    /// The length of a `[X]` or `[X; N]` value.
    Len(Place),
}

struct Place {
    base: PlaceBase,
    projection: List<PlaceElem>,
}

enum ProjectionElem {
    // ...
    ConstantIndex {
        offset: Nat,
        min_length: Nat,
        from_end: bool,
    },
    Subslice {
        from: Nat,
        to: Nat,
        from_end: bool,
    },
}
```

### Lowering to MIR

* For a slice pattern matching a slice, where the pattern has `N` elements specified, there is a check that the `Rvalue::Len` of the slice is at least `N` to decide if the pattern can match.

* There are two kinds of `ProjectionElem` used for slice patterns:

    1. `ProjectionElem::ConstantIndex` is an array or slice element with a known index. As a shorthand it's written `base[offset of min_length]` if `from_end` is false and `base[-offset of min_length]` if `from_end` is true. `base[-offset of min_length]` is the `len(base) - offset`th element of `base`.

    2. `ProjectionElem::Subslice` is a subslice of an array or slice with known bounds. As a shorthand it's written `base[from..to]` if `from_end` is false and `base[from:-to]` if `from_end` is true. `base[from:-to]` is the subslice `base[from..len(base) - to]`.

    * Note that `ProjectionElem::Index` is used for indexing expressions, but not for slice patterns. It's written `base[idx]`.

* When binding an array pattern, any individual element binding is lowered to an assignment or borrow of `base[offset of len]` where `offset` is the element's index in the array and `len` is the array's length.

* When binding a slice pattern, let `N` be the number of elements that have patterns. Elements before the subslice pattern (`prefix`) are lowered to `base[offset of N]` where `offset` is the element's index from the start. Elements after the subslice pattern (`suffix`) are lowered to `base[-offset of N]` where `offset` is the element's index from the end, plus 1.

* Subslices of arrays are lowered to `base[from..to]` where `from` is the number of elements before the subslice pattern and `to = len(array) - len(suffix)` is the length of the array minus the number of elements after the subslice pattern.

* Subslices of slices are lowered to `base[from:-to]` where `from` is the number of elements before the subslice pattern (`len(prefix)`) and `to` is the number of elements after the subslice pattern (`len(suffix)`).

### Safety and const checking

* Subslice patterns do not introduce any new unsafe operations.

* As subslice patterns for arrays are irrefutable, they are allowed in const contexts. As are `[..]` and `[ref y @ ..]` patterns for slices. However, `ref mut` bindings are only allowed with `feature(const_mut_refs)` for now.

* As other subslice patterns for slices require a `match`, `if let`, or `while let`, they are only allowed with `feature(const_if_match, const_fn)` for now.

* Subslice patterns may occur in promoted constants.

### Borrow and move checking

* A subslice pattern can be moved from if it has an array type `[E; N]` and the parent array can be moved from.

* Moving from an array subslice pattern moves from all of the elements of the array within the subslice.

    * If the subslice contains at least one element, this means that dynamic indexing (`arr[idx]`) is no longer allowed on the array.

    * The array can be reinitialized and can still be matched with another slice pattern that uses a disjoint set of elements.

* A subslice pattern can be mutably borrowed if the parent array/slice can be mutably borrowed.

* When determining whether an access conflicts with a borrow and at least one is a slice pattern:

    * `x[from..to]` always conflicts with `x` and `x[idx]` (where `idx` is a variable).

    * `x[from..to]` conflicts with `x[idx of len]` if `from <= idx` and `idx < to` (that is, `idx ∈ from..to`).

    * `x[from..to]` conflicts with `x[from2..to2]` if `from < to2` and `from2 < to` (that is, `(from..to) ∩ (from2..to2) ≠ ∅`).

    * `x[from:-to]` always conflicts with `x`, `x[idx]`, and `x[from2:-to2]`.

    * `x[from:-to]` conflicts with `x[idx of len]` if `from <= idx`.

    * `x[from:-to]` conflicts with `x[-idx of len]` if `to < idx`.

* A constant index from the end conflicts with other elements as follows:

    * `x[-idx of len]` always conflicts with `x` and `x[idx]`.

    * `x[-idx of len]` conflicts with `x[-idx2 of len2]` if `idx == idx2`.

    * `x[-idx of len]` conflicts with `x[idx2 of len2]` if `idx + idx2 >= max(len, len2)`.

## Tests

The tests can be primarily seen in the PR itself. Here are some of them:

### Parsing (3)

* Testing that `..` patterns are syntactically allowed in all pattern contexts (2)
    * [pattern/rest-pat-syntactic.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/rest-pat-syntactic.rs)
    * [ignore-all-the-things.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/ignore-allthe-things.rs)

* Slice patterns allow a trailing comma, including after `..` (1)
    * [trailing-comma.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/trailing-comma.rs)

### Lowering (2)

* `@ ..` isn't allowed outside of slice patterns and only allowed once in each pattern (1)
    * [pattern/rest-pat-semantic-disallowed.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/rest-pat-semantic-disallowed.rs)

* Mulitple `..` patterns are not allowed (1)
    * [parser/match-vec-invalid.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/53712f8637dbe326df569a90814aae1cc5429710/src/test/ui/parser/match-vec-invalid.rs)

### Type checking (5)

* Default binding modes apply to slice patterns (2)
    * [rfc-2005-default-binding-mode/slice.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/rfc-2005-default-binding-mode/slice.rs)
    * [rfcs/rfc-2005-default-binding-mode/slice.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/rfcs/rfc-2005-default-binding-mode/slice.rs)

* Array patterns cannot have more elements in the pattern than in the array (2)
    * [match/match-vec-mismatch.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/match/match-vec-mismatch.rs)
    * [error-codes/E0528.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/error-codes/E0528.rs)

* Array subslice patterns have array types (1)
    * [array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-pass.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-pass.rs)

### Exhaustiveness and usefulness checking (20)

* Large subslice matches don't stack-overflow the exhaustiveness checker (1)
    * [pattern/issue-53820-slice-pattern-large-array.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/issue-53820-slice-pattern-large-array.rs)

* Array patterns with subslices are irrefutable (1)
    * [issues/issue-7784.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-7784.rs)

* `[xs @ ..]` slice patterns are irrefutable (1)
    * [binding/irrefutable-slice-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/binding/irrefutable-slice-patterns.rs)

* Subslice patterns can match zero-length slices (2)
    * [issues/issue-15080.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-15080.rs)
    * [issues/issue-15104.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-15104.rs)

* General tests (13)
    * [issues/issue-12369.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-12369.rs)
    * [issues/issue-37598.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-37598.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/match-vec-unreachable.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/match-vec-unreachable.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/non-exhaustive-match.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/non-exhaustive-match.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/non-exhaustive-match-nested.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/non-exhaustive-match-nested.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/non-exhaustive-pattern-witness.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/non-exhaustive-pattern-witness.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/65413-constants-and-slices-exhaustiveness.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/65413-constants-and-slices-exhaustiveness.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/match-byte-array-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/match-byte-array-patterns.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/match-slice-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/match-slice-patterns.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/slice-patterns-exhaustiveness.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/slice-patterns-exhaustiveness.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/slice-patterns-irrefutable.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/slice-patterns-irrefutable.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/slice-patterns-reachability.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/slice-patterns-reachability.rs)
    * [uninhabited/uninhabited-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/uninhabited/uninhabited-patterns.rs)

* Interactions with or-patterns (2)
    * [or-patterns/exhaustiveness-pass.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/or-patterns/exhaustiveness-pass.rs)
    * [or-patterns/exhaustiveness-unreachable-pattern.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/or-patterns/exhaustiveness-unreachable-pattern.rs)

### Borrow checking (28)

* Slice patterns can only move from owned, fixed-length arrays (4)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-move-out-of-vec-tail.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-move-out-of-vec-tail.rs)
    * [moves/move-out-of-slice-2.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/moves/move-out-of-slice-2.rs)
    * [moves/move-out-of-array-ref.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/moves/move-out-of-array-ref.rs)
    * [issues/issue-12567.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-12567.rs)

* Moves from arrays are tracked by element (2)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array-no-overlap.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array-no-overlap.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array-use-no-overlap.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array-use-no-overlap.rs)

* Slice patterns cannot be used on moved-from slices/arrays (2)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array-use.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array-use.rs)

* Slice patterns cannot be used with conflicting borrows (3)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-describe-lvalue.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-describe-lvalue.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-array.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-array.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-slice.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-slice.rs)

* Borrows from slice patterns are tracked and only conflict when there is possible overlap (6)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-array-no-overlap.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-array-no-overlap.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-slice-no-overlap.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-slice-no-overlap.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-rpass.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-rpass.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-element-loan.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-element-loan.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-loan-from-mut.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-loan-from-mut.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-tail-element-loan.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-tail-element-loan.rs)

* Slice patterns affect indexing expressions (1)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-move-tail.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-move-tail.rs)

* Borrow and move interactions with `box` patterns (1)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-move-tail.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-move-tail.rs)

* Slice patterns correctly affect inference of closure captures (2)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-closures-slice-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-closures-slice-patterns.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-closures-slice-patterns-ok.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-closures-slice-patterns-ok.rs)

* Interactions with `#![feature(bindings_after_at)]` (7)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-move-and-move.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-move-and-move.rs)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-at-and-box-pass.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-at-and-box-pass.rs)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-at-and-box.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-at-and-box.rs)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-by-copy-bindings-in-at.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-by-copy-bindings-in-at.rs)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-ref-both-sides.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-ref-both-sides.rs)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-ref-mut-and-ref.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-ref-mut-and-ref.rs)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-ref-mut-twice.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-ref-mut-twice.rs)

* Misc (1)
    * [issues/issue-26619.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-26619.rs)

### MIR lowering (1)

* [uniform_array_move_out.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/mir-opt/uniform_array_move_out.rs)

### Evaluation (19)

* Slice patterns don't cause leaks or double drops (2)
    * [drop/dynamic-drop.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/drop/dynamic-drop.rs)
    * [drop/dynamic-drop-async.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/drop/dynamic-drop-async.rs)

* General run-pass tests (10)
    * [array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-pass.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-pass.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/vec-matching-fixed.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/vec-matching-fixed.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/vec-matching-fold.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/vec-matching-fold.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/vec-matching-legal-tail-element-borrow.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/vec-matching-legal-tail-element-borrow.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/vec-matching.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/vec-matching.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/vec-tail-matching.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/vec-tail-matching.rs)
    * [binding/irrefutable-slice-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/binding/irrefutable-slice-patterns.rs)
    * [binding/match-byte-array-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/binding/match-byte-array-patterns.rs)
    * [binding/match-vec-alternatives.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/binding/match-vec-alternatives.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-rpass.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-rpass.rs)

* Matching a large by-value array (1)
    * [issues/issue-17877.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-17877.rs)

* Uninhabited elements (1)
    * [binding/empty-types-in-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/binding/empty-types-in-patterns.rs)

* Zero-sized elements (3)
    * [binding/zero_sized_subslice_match.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/binding/zero_sized_subslice_match.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval-match.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval-match.rs)

* Evaluation in const contexts (2)
    * [array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval-match.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval-match.rs)

## Misc (1)

* Exercising a case where const-prop cased an ICE (1)
    * [consts/const_prop_slice_pat_ice.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/consts/const_prop_slice_pat_ice.rs)

## History

- 2012-12-08, commit rust-lang@1968cb3
  Author: Jakub Wieczorek
  Reviewers: @graydon

  This is where slice patterns were first implemented. It is particularly instructive to read the `vec-tail-matching.rs` test.

- 2013-08-20, issue rust-lang#8636
  Author: @huonw
  Fixed by @mikhail-m1 in rust-lang#51894

  The issue describes a problem wherein the borrow-checker would not consider disjointness when checking mutable references in slice patterns.

- 2014-09-03, RFC rust-lang/rfcs#164
  Author: @brson
  Reviewers: The Core Team

  The RFC decided to feature gate slice patterns due to concerns over lack of oversight and the exhaustiveness checking logic not having seen much love. Since then, the exhaustivenss checking algorithm, in particular for slice patterns, has been substantially refactored and tests have been added.

- 2014-09-03, RFC rust-lang/rfcs#202
  Author: @krdln
  Reviewers: The Core Team

  > Change syntax of subslices matching from `..xs` to `xs..` to be more consistent with the rest of the language and allow future backwards compatible improvements.

  In 2019, rust-lang/rfcs#2359 changed the syntax again in favor of `..` and `xs @ ..`.

- 2014-09-08, PR rust-lang#17052
  Author: @pcwalton
  Reviewers: @alexcrichton and @sfackler

  This implemented the feature gating as specified in rust-lang/rfcs#164.

- 2015-03-06, RFC rust-lang/rfcs#495
  Author: @P1start
  Reviewers: The Core Team

  The RFC changed array and slice patterns like so:

  - Made them only match on arrays (`[T; N]`) and slice types (`[T]`), not references to slice types (`& mut? [T]`).
  - Made subslice matching yield a value of type `[T; N]` or `[T]`, not `& mut? [T]`.
  - Allowed multiple mutable references to be made to different parts of the same array or slice in array patterns.

  These changes were made to fit with the introduction of DSTs like `[T]` as well as with e.g. `box [a, b, c]` (`Box<[T]>`) in the future. All points remain true today, in particular with the advent of default binding modes.

- 2015-03-22, PR rust-lang#23361
  Author: @petrochenkov
  Reviewers: Unknown

  The PR adjusted codegen ("trans") such that `let ref a = *"abcdef"` would no longer ICE, paving the way for rust-lang/rfcs#495.

- 2015-05-28, PR rust-lang#23794
  Author: @brson
  Reviewers: @nrc

  The PR feature gated slice patterns in more contexts.

- 2016-06-09, PR rust-lang#32202
  Author: @arielb1
  Reviewers: @eddyb and @nikomatsakis

  This implemented RFC rust-lang/rfcs#495 via a MIR based implementation fixing some bugs.

- 2016-09-16, PR rust-lang#36353
  Author: @arielb1
  Reviewers: @nagisa, @pnkfelix, and @nikomatsakis

  The PR made move-checker improvements prohibiting moves out of slices.

- 2018-02-17, PR rust-lang#47926
  Author: @mikhail-m1
  Reviewers: @nikomatsakis

  This added the `UniformArrayMoveOut` which converted move-out-from-array by `Subslice` and `ConstIndex {.., from_end: true }` to `ConstIndex` move out(s) from the beginning of the array. This fixed some problems with the MIR borrow-checker and drop-elaboration of arrays.

  Unfortunately, the transformation ultimately proved insufficient for soundness and was removed and replaced in rust-lang#66650.

- 2018-02-19, PR rust-lang#48355
  Author: @mikhail-m1
  Reviewers: @nikomatsakis

  After rust-lang#47926, this restored some MIR optimizations after drop-elaboration and borrow-checking.

- 2018-03-20, PR rust-lang#48516
  Author: @petrochenkov
  Reviewers: @nikomatsakis

  This stabilized fixed length slice patterns `[a, b, c]` without variable length subslices and moved subslice patterns into `#![feature(slice_patterns)`. See rust-lang#48836 wherein the language team accepted the proposal to stabilize.

- 2018-07-06, PR rust-lang#51894
  Author: @mikhail-m1
  Reviewers: @nikomatsakis

  rust-lang#8636 was fixed such that the borrow-checker would consider disjointness with respect to mutable references in slice patterns.

- 2019-06-30, RFC rust-lang/rfcs#2359
  Author: @petrochenkov
  Reviewers: The Language Team

  The RFC switched the syntax of subslice patterns to `{$binding @}? ..` as opposed to `.. $pat?` (which was what the RFC originally proposed). This RFC reignited the work towards finishing the implementation and the testing of slice patterns which eventually lead to this stabilization proposal.

- 2019-06-30, RFC rust-lang/rfcs#2707
  Author: @petrochenkov
  Reviewers: The Language Team

  This RFC built upon rust-lang/rfcs#2359 turning `..` into a full-fledged pattern (`Pat |= Rest:".." ;`), as opposed to a special part of slice and tuple patterns, moving previously syntactic restrictions into semantic ones.

- 2019-07-03, PR rust-lang#62255
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @varkor

  This closed the old tracking issue (rust-lang#23121) in favor of the new one (rust-lang#62254) due to the new RFCs having been accepted.

- 2019-07-28, PR rust-lang#62550
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @petrochenkov and @eddyb

  Implemented RFCs rust-lang/rfcs#2707 and rust-lang/rfcs#2359 by introducing the `..` syntactic rest pattern form as well as changing the lowering to subslice and subtuple patterns and the necessary semantic restrictions as per the RFCs.

  Moreover, the parser was cleaned up to use a more generic framework for parsing sequences of things. This framework was employed in parsing slice patterns.

  Finally, the PR introduced parser recovery for half-open ranges (e.g., `..X`, `..=X`, and `X..`), demonstrating in practice that the RFCs proposed syntax will enable half-open ranges if we want to add those (which is done in rust-lang#67258).

- 2019-07-30, PR rust-lang#63111
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @estebank

  Added a test which comprehensively exercised the parsing of `..` rest patterns. That is, the PR exercised the specification in rust-lang/rfcs#2707. Moreover, a test was added for the semantic restrictions noted in the RFC.

- 2019-07-31, PR rust-lang#63129
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @oli-obk

  Hardened the test-suite for subslice and subarray patterns with a run-pass tests. This test exercises both type checking and dynamic semantics.

- 2019-09-15, PR rust-lang/rust-analyzer#1848
  Author: @ecstatic-morse
  Reviewers: @matklad

  This implemented the syntactic change (rest patterns, `..`) in rust-analyzer.

- 2019-11-05, PR rust-lang#65874
  Author: @Nadrieril
  Reviewers: @varkor, @arielb1, and @Centril

  Usefulness / exhaustiveness checking saw a major refactoring clarifying the analysis by emphasizing that each row of the matrix can be seen as a sort of stack from which we pop constructors.

- 2019-11-12, PR rust-lang#66129
  Author: @Nadrieril
  Reviewers: @varkor, @Centril, and @estebank

  Usefulness / exhaustiveness checking of slice patterns were refactored in favor of clearer code. Before the PR, variable-length slice patterns were eagerly expanded into a union of fixed-length slices. They now have their own special constructor, which allows expanding them more lazily. As a side-effect, this improved diagnostics. Moreover, the test suite for exhaustiveness checking of slice patterns was hardened.

- 2019-11-20, PR rust-lang#66497
  Author: @Nadrieril
  Reviewers: @varkor and @Centril

  Building on the previous PR, this one fixed a bug rust-lang#53820 wherein sufficiently large subarray patterns (`match [0u8; 16*1024] { [..] => {}}`) would result in crashing the compiler with a stack-overflow. The PR did this by treating array patterns in a more first-class way (using a variable-length mechanism also used for slices) rather than like large tuples. This also had the effect of improving diagnostics for non-exhaustive matches.

- 2019-11-28, PR rust-lang#66603
  Author: @Nadrieril
  Reviewers: @varkor

  Fixed a bug rust-lang#65413 wherein constants, slice patterns, and exhaustiveness checking interacted in a suboptimal way conspiring to suggest that a reachable arm was in fact unreachable.

- 2019-12-12, PR rust-lang#66650
  Author: @matthewjasper
  Reviewers: @pnkfelix and @Centril

  Removed the `UniformArrayMoveOut` MIR transformation pass in favor of baking the necessary logic into the borrow-checker, drop elaboration and MIR building itself. This fixed a number of bugs, including a soundness hole rust-lang#66502. Moreover, the PR added a slew of tests for borrow- and move-checking of slice patterns as well as a test for the dynamic semantics of dropping subslice patterns.

- 2019-12-16, PR rust-lang#67318
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @matthewjasper

  Improved documentation for AST->HIR lowering + type checking of slice as well as minor code simplification.

- 2019-12-21, PR rust-lang#67467
  Author: @matthewjasper
  Reviewers: @oli-obk, @RalfJung, and @Centril

  Fixed bugs in the const evaluation of slice patterns and added tests for const evaluation as well as borrow- and move-checking.

- 2019-12-22, PR rust-lang#67439
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @matthewjasper

  Cleaned up HAIR lowering of slice patterns, removing special cased dead code for the unrepresentable `[a, b] @ ..`. The PR also refactored type checking for slice patterns.

- 2019-12-23, PR rust-lang#67546
  Author: @oli-obk
  Reviewers: @varkor and @RalfJung

  Fixed an ICE in the MIR interpretation of slice patterns.

- 2019-12-24, PR rust-lang#66296
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @pnkfelix and @matthewjasper

  This implemented `#![feature(bindings_after_at)]` which allows writing e.g. `a @ Some([_, b @ ..])`. This is not directly linked to slice patterns other than with patterns in general. However, the combination of the feature and `slice_patterns` received some testing in the PR.

- 2020-01-09, PR rust-lang#67990
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @matthewjasper

  This hardened move-checker tests for `match` expressions in relation to rust-lang#53114.

- This PR stabilizes `slice_patterns`.

## Related / possible future work

There is on-going work to improve pattern matching in other ways (the relevance of some of these are indirect, and only by composition):

- OR-patterns, `pat_0 | .. | pat_n` is almost implemented.
  Tracking issue: rust-lang#54883

- Bindings after `@`, e.g., `x @ Some(y)` is implemented.
  Tracking issue: rust-lang#65490

- Half-open range patterns, e.g., `X..`, `..X`, and `..=X` as well as exclusive range patterns, e.g., `X..Y`.
  Tracking issue: rust-lang#67264 and rust-lang#37854
  The relevance here is that this work demonstrates, in practice, that there are no syntactic conflicts introduced by the stabilization of subslice patterns.

As for more direct improvements to slice patterns, some avenues could be:

- Box patterns, e.g., `box [a, b, .., c]` to match on `Box<[T]>`.
  Tracking issue: rust-lang#29641
  This issue currently has no path to stabilization.

  Note that it is currently possible to match on `Box<[T]>` or `Vec<T>` by first dereferencing them to slices.

- `DerefPure`, which would allow e.g., using slice patterns to match on `Vec<T>` (e.g., moving out of it).

Another idea which was raised by [RFC 2707](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2707-dotdot-patterns.md#future-possibilities) and [RFC 2359](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2359-subslice-pattern-syntax.md#pat-vs-pat) was to allow binding a subtuple pattern. That is, we could allow `(a, xs @ .., b)`. However, while we could allow by-value bindings to `..` as in `xs @ ..` at zero cost, the same cannot be said of by-reference bindings, e.g. `(a, ref xs @ .., b)`. The issue here becomes that for a reference to be legal, we have to represent `xs` contiguously in memory. In effect, we are forced into a [`HList`](https://docs.rs/frunk/0.3.1/frunk/hlist/struct.HCons.html) based representation for tuples.
Centril added a commit to Centril/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2020
…=matthewjasper

Stabilize `#![feature(slice_patterns)]` in 1.42.0

# Stabilization report

The following is the stabilization report for `#![feature(slice_patterns)]`.
This report is the collaborative effort of @matthewjasper and @Centril.

Tracking issue: rust-lang#62254
[Version target](https://forge.rust-lang.org/#current-release-versions): 1.42 (2020-01-30 => beta, 2020-03-12 => stable).

## Backstory: slice patterns

It is already possible to use slice patterns on stable Rust to match on arrays and slices. For example, to match on a slice, you may write:

```rust
fn foo(slice: &[&str]) {
    match slice {
        [] => { dbg!() }
        [a] => { dbg!(a); }
        [a, b] => { dbg!(a, b); }
        _ => {}
    //  ^ Fallback -- necessary because the length is unknown!
    }
}
```

To match on an array, you may instead write:

```rust
fn bar([a, b, c]: [u8; 3]) {}
//     --------- Length is known, so pattern is irrefutable.
```

However, on stable Rust, it is not yet possible to match on a subslice or subarray.

## A quick user guide: Subslice patterns

The ability to match on a subslice or subarray is gated under `#![feature(slice_patterns)]` and is what is proposed for stabilization here.

### The syntax of subslice patterns

Subslice / subarray patterns come in two flavors syntactically.

Common to both flavors is they use the token `..`, referred as a *"rest pattern"* in a pattern context. This rest pattern functions as a variable-length pattern, matching whatever amount of elements that haven't been matched already before and after.

When `..` is used syntactically as an element of a slice-pattern, either directly (1), or as part of a binding pattern (2), it becomes a subslice pattern.

On stable Rust, a rest pattern `..` can also be used in a tuple or tuple-struct pattern with `let (x, ..) = (1, 2, 3);` and `let TS(x, ..) = TS(1, 2, 3);` respectively.

### (1) Matching on a subslice without binding it

```rust
fn base(string: &str) -> u8 {
    match string.as_bytes() {
        [b'0', b'x', ..] => 16,
        [b'0', b'o', ..] => 8,
        [b'0', b'b', ..] => 2,
        _ => 10,
    }
}

fn main() {
    assert_eq!(base("0xFF"), 16);
    assert_eq!(base("0x"), 16);
}
```

In the function `base`, the pattern `[b'0', b'x', ..]` will match on any byte-string slice with the *prefix* `0x`. Note that `..` may match on nothing, so `0x` is a valid match.

### (2) Binding a subslice:

```rust
fn main() {
    #[derive(PartialEq, Debug)]
    struct X(u8);
    let xs: Vec<X> = vec![X(0), X(1), X(2)];

    if let [start @ .., end] = &*xs {
        //              --- bind on last element, assuming there is one.
        //  ---------- bind the initial elements, if there are any.
        assert_eq!(start, &[X(0), X(1)] as &[X]);
        assert_eq!(end, &X(2));
        let _: &[X] = start;
        let _: &X = end;
    }
}
```

In this case, `[start @ .., end]`  will match any non-empty slice, binding the last element to `end` and any elements before that to `start`. Note in particular that, as above, `start` may match on the empty slice.

### Only one `..` per slice pattern

In today's stable Rust, a tuple (struct) pattern `(a, b, c)` can only have one subtuple pattern (e.g., `(a, .., c)`). That is, if there is a rest pattern, it may only occur once. Any `..` that follow, as in e.g., `(a, .., b, ..)` will cause an error, as there is no way for the compiler to know what `b` applies to. This rule also applies to slice patterns. That is, you may also not write `[a, .., b, ..]`.

## Motivation

[PR rust-lang#67569]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/67569/files

Slice patterns provide a natural and efficient way to pattern match on slices and arrays. This is particularly useful as slices and arrays are quite a common occurence in modern software targeting modern hardware. However, as aforementioned, it's not yet possible to perform incomplete matches, which is seen in `fn base`, an example taken from the `rustc` codebase itself. This is where subslice patterns come in and extend slice patterns with the natural syntax `xs @ ..` and `..`, where the latter is already used for tuples and tuple structs. As an example of how subslice patterns can be used to clean up code, we have [PR rust-lang#67569]. In this PR, slice patterns enabled us to improve readability and reduce unsafety, at no loss to performance.

## Technical specification

### Grammar

The following specification is a *sub-set* of the grammar necessary to explain what interests us here. Note that stabilizing subslice patterns does not alter the stable grammar. The stabilization contains purely semantic changes.

```rust
Binding = reference:"ref"? mutable:"mut"? name:IDENT;

Pat =
  | ... // elided
  | Rest: ".."
  | Binding:{ binding:Binding { "@" subpat:Pat }? }
  | Slice:{ "[" elems:Pat* %% "," "]" }
  | Paren:{ "(" pat:Pat ")" }
  | Tuple:{ path:Path? "(" elems:Pat* &% "," ")" }
  ;
```

Notes:

1. `(..)` is interpreted as a `Tuple`, not a `Paren`.
   This means that `[a, (..)]` is interpreted as `Slice[Binding(a), Tuple[Rest]]` and not `Slice[Binding(a), Paren(Rest)]`.

### Name resolution

[resolve_pattern_inner]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_resolve/late/struct.LateResolutionVisitor.html#method.resolve_pattern_inner
[product context]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_resolve/late/enum.PatBoundCtx.html#variant.Product

A slice pattern is [resolved][resolve_pattern_inner] as a [product context] and `..` is given no special treatment.

### Abstract syntax of slice patterns

The abstract syntax (HIR level) is defined like so:

```rust
enum PatKind {
    ... // Other unimportant stuff.
    Wild,
    Binding {
        binding: Binding,
        subpat: Option<Pat>,
    },
    Slice {
        before: List<Pat>,
        slice: Option<Pat>,
        after: List<Pat>,
    },
}
```

[`hir::PatKind`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc/hir/enum.PatKind.html

The executable definition is found in [`hir::PatKind`].

### Lowering to abstract syntax

Lowering a slice pattern to its abstract syntax proceeds by:

1. Lowering each element pattern of the slice pattern, where:

    1. `..` is lowered to `_`,
       recording that it was a subslice pattern,

    2. `binding @ ..` is lowered to `binding @ _`,
       recording that it was a subslice pattern,

    3. and all other patterns are lowered as normal,
       recording that it was not a subslice pattern.

2. Taking all lowered elements until the first subslice pattern.

3. Take all following elements.

   If there are any,

      1. The head is the sub-`slice` pattern.
      2. The tail (`after`) must not contain a subslice pattern,
         or an error occurs.

[`LoweringContext::lower_pat_slice`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc/hir/lowering/struct.LoweringContext.html#method.lower_pat_slice

The full executable definition can be found in [`LoweringContext::lower_pat_slice`].

### Type checking slice patterns

#### Default binding modes

[non-reference pattern]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/reference/patterns.html#binding-modes
[`is_non_ref_pat`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_typeck/check/struct.FnCtxt.html#method.is_non_ref_pat
[peel_off_references]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_typeck/check/struct.FnCtxt.html#method.peel_off_references

A slice pattern is a [non-reference pattern] as defined in [`is_non_ref_pat`]. This means that when type checking a slice pattern, as many immediate reference types are [peeled off][peel_off_references] from the `expected` type as possible and the default binding mode is adjusted to by-reference before checking the slice pattern. See rust-lang#63118 for an algorithmic description.

[RFC 2359]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2359-subslice-pattern-syntax.md

[rfc-2359-gle]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2359-subslice-pattern-syntax.md#guide-level-explanation

See [RFC 2359]'s [guide-level explanation][rfc-2359-gle] and the tests listed below for examples of what effect this has.

#### Checking the pattern

Type checking a slice pattern proceeds as follows:

1. Resolve any type variables by a single level.
   If the result still is a type variable, error.

2. Determine the expected type for any subslice pattern (`slice_ty`) and for elements (`inner_ty`) depending on the expected type.

   1. If the expected type is an array (`[E; N]`):

      1. Evaluate the length of the array.
         If the length couldn't be evaluated, error.
         This may occur when we have e.g., `const N: usize`.
         Now `N` is known.

      2. If there is no sub-`slice` pattern,
         check `len(before) == N`,
         and otherwise error.

      3. Otherwise,
         set `S = N - len(before) - len(after)`,
         and check `N >= 0` and otherwise error.
         Set `slice_ty = [E; S]`.

      Set `inner_ty = E`.

   2. If the expected type is a slice (`[E]`),
      set `inner_ty = E` and `slice_ty = [E]`.

   3. Otherwise, error.

3. Check each element in `before` and `after` against `inner_ty`.
4. If it exists, check `slice` against `slice_ty`.

[`check_pat_slice`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_typeck/check/struct.FnCtxt.html#method.check_pat_slice

For an executable definition, see [`check_pat_slice`].

### Typed abstract syntax of slice and array patterns

The typed abstract syntax (HAIR level) is defined like so:

```rust
enum PatKind {
    ... // Other unimportant stuff.
    Wild,
    Binding {
        ... // Elided.
    }
    Slice {
        prefix: List<Pat>,
        slice: Option<Pat>,
        suffix: List<Pat>,
    },
    Array {
        prefix: List<Pat>,
        slice: Option<Pat>,
        suffix: List<Pat>,
    },
}
```

[`hair::pattern::PatKind`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_mir/hair/pattern/enum.PatKind.html

The executable definition is found in [`hair::pattern::PatKind`].

### Lowering to typed abstract syntax

Lowering a slice pattern to its typed abstract syntax proceeds by:

1. Lowering each pattern in `before` into `prefix`.
2. Lowering the `slice`, if it exists, into `slice`.
   1. A `Wild` pattern in abstract syntax is lowered to `Wild`.
   2. A `Binding` pattern in abstract syntax is lowered to `Binding { .. }`.
3. Lowering each pattern in `after` into `after`.
4. If the type is `[E; N]`, construct `PatKind::Array { prefix, slice, after }`, otherwise `PatKind::Slice { prefix, slice, after }`.

[`PatCtxt::slice_or_array_pattern`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_mir/hair/pattern/struct.PatCtxt.html#method.slice_or_array_pattern

The executable definition is found in [`PatCtxt::slice_or_array_pattern`].

### Exhaustiveness checking

Let `E` be the element type of a slice or array.

- For array types, `[E; N]` with a known length `N`, the full set of constructors required for an exahustive match is the sequence `ctors(E)^N` where `ctors` denotes the constructors required for an exhaustive match of `E`.

- Otherwise, for slice types `[E]`, or for an array type with an unknown length `[E; ?L]`, the full set of constructors is the infinite sequence `⋃_i=0^∞ ctors(E)^i`. This entails that an exhaustive match without a cover-all pattern (e.g. `_` or `binding`) or a subslice pattern (e.g., `[..]` or `[_, _, ..]`) is impossible.

- `PatKind::{Slice, Array}(prefix, None, suffix @ [])` cover a sequence of of `len(prefix)` covered by `patterns`. Note that `suffix.len() > 0` with `slice == None` is unrepresentable.

- `PatKind::{Slice, Array}(prefix, Some(s), suffix)` cover a `sequence` with `prefix` as the start and `suffix` as the end and where `len(prefix) + len(suffix) <= len(sequence)`. The `..` in the middle is interpreted as an unbounded number of `_`s in terms of exhaustiveness checking.

### MIR representation

The relevant MIR representation for the lowering into MIR, which is discussed in the next section, includes:

```rust
enum Rvalue {
    // ...
    /// The length of a `[X]` or `[X; N]` value.
    Len(Place),
}

struct Place {
    base: PlaceBase,
    projection: List<PlaceElem>,
}

enum ProjectionElem {
    // ...
    ConstantIndex {
        offset: Nat,
        min_length: Nat,
        from_end: bool,
    },
    Subslice {
        from: Nat,
        to: Nat,
        from_end: bool,
    },
}
```

### Lowering to MIR

* For a slice pattern matching a slice, where the pattern has `N` elements specified, there is a check that the `Rvalue::Len` of the slice is at least `N` to decide if the pattern can match.

* There are two kinds of `ProjectionElem` used for slice patterns:

    1. `ProjectionElem::ConstantIndex` is an array or slice element with a known index. As a shorthand it's written `base[offset of min_length]` if `from_end` is false and `base[-offset of min_length]` if `from_end` is true. `base[-offset of min_length]` is the `len(base) - offset`th element of `base`.

    2. `ProjectionElem::Subslice` is a subslice of an array or slice with known bounds. As a shorthand it's written `base[from..to]` if `from_end` is false and `base[from:-to]` if `from_end` is true. `base[from:-to]` is the subslice `base[from..len(base) - to]`.

    * Note that `ProjectionElem::Index` is used for indexing expressions, but not for slice patterns. It's written `base[idx]`.

* When binding an array pattern, any individual element binding is lowered to an assignment or borrow of `base[offset of len]` where `offset` is the element's index in the array and `len` is the array's length.

* When binding a slice pattern, let `N` be the number of elements that have patterns. Elements before the subslice pattern (`prefix`) are lowered to `base[offset of N]` where `offset` is the element's index from the start. Elements after the subslice pattern (`suffix`) are lowered to `base[-offset of N]` where `offset` is the element's index from the end, plus 1.

* Subslices of arrays are lowered to `base[from..to]` where `from` is the number of elements before the subslice pattern and `to = len(array) - len(suffix)` is the length of the array minus the number of elements after the subslice pattern.

* Subslices of slices are lowered to `base[from:-to]` where `from` is the number of elements before the subslice pattern (`len(prefix)`) and `to` is the number of elements after the subslice pattern (`len(suffix)`).

### Safety and const checking

* Subslice patterns do not introduce any new unsafe operations.

* As subslice patterns for arrays are irrefutable, they are allowed in const contexts. As are `[..]` and `[ref y @ ..]` patterns for slices. However, `ref mut` bindings are only allowed with `feature(const_mut_refs)` for now.

* As other subslice patterns for slices require a `match`, `if let`, or `while let`, they are only allowed with `feature(const_if_match, const_fn)` for now.

* Subslice patterns may occur in promoted constants.

### Borrow and move checking

* A subslice pattern can be moved from if it has an array type `[E; N]` and the parent array can be moved from.

* Moving from an array subslice pattern moves from all of the elements of the array within the subslice.

    * If the subslice contains at least one element, this means that dynamic indexing (`arr[idx]`) is no longer allowed on the array.

    * The array can be reinitialized and can still be matched with another slice pattern that uses a disjoint set of elements.

* A subslice pattern can be mutably borrowed if the parent array/slice can be mutably borrowed.

* When determining whether an access conflicts with a borrow and at least one is a slice pattern:

    * `x[from..to]` always conflicts with `x` and `x[idx]` (where `idx` is a variable).

    * `x[from..to]` conflicts with `x[idx of len]` if `from <= idx` and `idx < to` (that is, `idx ∈ from..to`).

    * `x[from..to]` conflicts with `x[from2..to2]` if `from < to2` and `from2 < to` (that is, `(from..to) ∩ (from2..to2) ≠ ∅`).

    * `x[from:-to]` always conflicts with `x`, `x[idx]`, and `x[from2:-to2]`.

    * `x[from:-to]` conflicts with `x[idx of len]` if `from <= idx`.

    * `x[from:-to]` conflicts with `x[-idx of len]` if `to < idx`.

* A constant index from the end conflicts with other elements as follows:

    * `x[-idx of len]` always conflicts with `x` and `x[idx]`.

    * `x[-idx of len]` conflicts with `x[-idx2 of len2]` if `idx == idx2`.

    * `x[-idx of len]` conflicts with `x[idx2 of len2]` if `idx + idx2 >= max(len, len2)`.

## Tests

The tests can be primarily seen in the PR itself. Here are some of them:

### Parsing (3)

* Testing that `..` patterns are syntactically allowed in all pattern contexts (2)
    * [pattern/rest-pat-syntactic.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/rest-pat-syntactic.rs)
    * [ignore-all-the-things.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/ignore-allthe-things.rs)

* Slice patterns allow a trailing comma, including after `..` (1)
    * [trailing-comma.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/trailing-comma.rs)

### Lowering (2)

* `@ ..` isn't allowed outside of slice patterns and only allowed once in each pattern (1)
    * [pattern/rest-pat-semantic-disallowed.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/rest-pat-semantic-disallowed.rs)

* Mulitple `..` patterns are not allowed (1)
    * [parser/match-vec-invalid.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/53712f8637dbe326df569a90814aae1cc5429710/src/test/ui/parser/match-vec-invalid.rs)

### Type checking (5)

* Default binding modes apply to slice patterns (2)
    * [rfc-2005-default-binding-mode/slice.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/rfc-2005-default-binding-mode/slice.rs)
    * [rfcs/rfc-2005-default-binding-mode/slice.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/rfcs/rfc-2005-default-binding-mode/slice.rs)

* Array patterns cannot have more elements in the pattern than in the array (2)
    * [match/match-vec-mismatch.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/match/match-vec-mismatch.rs)
    * [error-codes/E0528.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/error-codes/E0528.rs)

* Array subslice patterns have array types (1)
    * [array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-pass.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-pass.rs)

### Exhaustiveness and usefulness checking (20)

* Large subslice matches don't stack-overflow the exhaustiveness checker (1)
    * [pattern/issue-53820-slice-pattern-large-array.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/issue-53820-slice-pattern-large-array.rs)

* Array patterns with subslices are irrefutable (1)
    * [issues/issue-7784.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-7784.rs)

* `[xs @ ..]` slice patterns are irrefutable (1)
    * [binding/irrefutable-slice-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/binding/irrefutable-slice-patterns.rs)

* Subslice patterns can match zero-length slices (2)
    * [issues/issue-15080.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-15080.rs)
    * [issues/issue-15104.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-15104.rs)

* General tests (13)
    * [issues/issue-12369.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-12369.rs)
    * [issues/issue-37598.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-37598.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/match-vec-unreachable.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/match-vec-unreachable.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/non-exhaustive-match.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/non-exhaustive-match.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/non-exhaustive-match-nested.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/non-exhaustive-match-nested.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/non-exhaustive-pattern-witness.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/non-exhaustive-pattern-witness.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/65413-constants-and-slices-exhaustiveness.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/65413-constants-and-slices-exhaustiveness.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/match-byte-array-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/match-byte-array-patterns.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/match-slice-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/match-slice-patterns.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/slice-patterns-exhaustiveness.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/slice-patterns-exhaustiveness.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/slice-patterns-irrefutable.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/slice-patterns-irrefutable.rs)
    * [pattern/usefulness/slice-patterns-reachability.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/usefulness/slice-patterns-reachability.rs)
    * [uninhabited/uninhabited-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/uninhabited/uninhabited-patterns.rs)

* Interactions with or-patterns (2)
    * [or-patterns/exhaustiveness-pass.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/or-patterns/exhaustiveness-pass.rs)
    * [or-patterns/exhaustiveness-unreachable-pattern.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/or-patterns/exhaustiveness-unreachable-pattern.rs)

### Borrow checking (28)

* Slice patterns can only move from owned, fixed-length arrays (4)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-move-out-of-vec-tail.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-move-out-of-vec-tail.rs)
    * [moves/move-out-of-slice-2.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/moves/move-out-of-slice-2.rs)
    * [moves/move-out-of-array-ref.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/moves/move-out-of-array-ref.rs)
    * [issues/issue-12567.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-12567.rs)

* Moves from arrays are tracked by element (2)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array-no-overlap.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array-no-overlap.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array-use-no-overlap.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array-use-no-overlap.rs)

* Slice patterns cannot be used on moved-from slices/arrays (2)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array-use.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-move-out-from-array-use.rs)

* Slice patterns cannot be used with conflicting borrows (3)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-describe-lvalue.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-describe-lvalue.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-array.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-array.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-slice.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-slice.rs)

* Borrows from slice patterns are tracked and only conflict when there is possible overlap (6)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-array-no-overlap.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-array-no-overlap.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-slice-no-overlap.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-slice-no-overlap.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-rpass.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-rpass.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-element-loan.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-element-loan.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-loan-from-mut.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-loan-from-mut.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-tail-element-loan.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-tail-element-loan.rs)

* Slice patterns affect indexing expressions (1)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-move-tail.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-move-tail.rs)

* Borrow and move interactions with `box` patterns (1)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-move-tail.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-vec-pattern-move-tail.rs)

* Slice patterns correctly affect inference of closure captures (2)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-closures-slice-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-closures-slice-patterns.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-closures-slice-patterns-ok.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-closures-slice-patterns-ok.rs)

* Interactions with `#![feature(bindings_after_at)]` (7)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-move-and-move.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-move-and-move.rs)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-at-and-box-pass.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-at-and-box-pass.rs)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-at-and-box.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-at-and-box.rs)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-by-copy-bindings-in-at.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-by-copy-bindings-in-at.rs)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-ref-both-sides.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-ref-both-sides.rs)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-ref-mut-and-ref.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-ref-mut-and-ref.rs)
    * [pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-ref-mut-twice.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/pattern/bindings-after-at/borrowck-pat-ref-mut-twice.rs)

* Misc (1)
    * [issues/issue-26619.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-26619.rs)

### MIR lowering (1)

* [uniform_array_move_out.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/mir-opt/uniform_array_move_out.rs)

### Evaluation (19)

* Slice patterns don't cause leaks or double drops (2)
    * [drop/dynamic-drop.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/drop/dynamic-drop.rs)
    * [drop/dynamic-drop-async.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/drop/dynamic-drop-async.rs)

* General run-pass tests (10)
    * [array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-pass.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-pass.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/vec-matching-fixed.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/vec-matching-fixed.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/vec-matching-fold.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/vec-matching-fold.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/vec-matching-legal-tail-element-borrow.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/vec-matching-legal-tail-element-borrow.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/vec-matching.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/vec-matching.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/vec-tail-matching.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/vec-tail-matching.rs)
    * [binding/irrefutable-slice-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/binding/irrefutable-slice-patterns.rs)
    * [binding/match-byte-array-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/binding/match-byte-array-patterns.rs)
    * [binding/match-vec-alternatives.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/binding/match-vec-alternatives.rs)
    * [borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-rpass.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/borrowck/borrowck-slice-pattern-element-loan-rpass.rs)

* Matching a large by-value array (1)
    * [issues/issue-17877.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/issues/issue-17877.rs)

* Uninhabited elements (1)
    * [binding/empty-types-in-patterns.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/binding/empty-types-in-patterns.rs)

* Zero-sized elements (3)
    * [binding/zero_sized_subslice_match.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/binding/zero_sized_subslice_match.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval-match.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval-match.rs)

* Evaluation in const contexts (2)
    * [array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval.rs)
    * [array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval-match.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/subslice-patterns-const-eval-match.rs)

## Misc (1)

* Exercising a case where const-prop cased an ICE (1)
    * [consts/const_prop_slice_pat_ice.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/acb6690e1d58fc5f262ada5b5030fe73e601f1e8/src/test/ui/consts/const_prop_slice_pat_ice.rs)

## History

- 2012-12-08, commit rust-lang@1968cb3
  Author: Jakub Wieczorek
  Reviewers: @graydon

  This is where slice patterns were first implemented. It is particularly instructive to read the `vec-tail-matching.rs` test.

- 2013-08-20, issue rust-lang#8636
  Author: @huonw
  Fixed by @mikhail-m1 in rust-lang#51894

  The issue describes a problem wherein the borrow-checker would not consider disjointness when checking mutable references in slice patterns.

- 2014-09-03, RFC rust-lang/rfcs#164
  Author: @brson
  Reviewers: The Core Team

  The RFC decided to feature gate slice patterns due to concerns over lack of oversight and the exhaustiveness checking logic not having seen much love. Since then, the exhaustivenss checking algorithm, in particular for slice patterns, has been substantially refactored and tests have been added.

- 2014-09-03, RFC rust-lang/rfcs#202
  Author: @krdln
  Reviewers: The Core Team

  > Change syntax of subslices matching from `..xs` to `xs..` to be more consistent with the rest of the language and allow future backwards compatible improvements.

  In 2019, rust-lang/rfcs#2359 changed the syntax again in favor of `..` and `xs @ ..`.

- 2014-09-08, PR rust-lang#17052
  Author: @pcwalton
  Reviewers: @alexcrichton and @sfackler

  This implemented the feature gating as specified in rust-lang/rfcs#164.

- 2015-03-06, RFC rust-lang/rfcs#495
  Author: @P1start
  Reviewers: The Core Team

  The RFC changed array and slice patterns like so:

  - Made them only match on arrays (`[T; N]`) and slice types (`[T]`), not references to slice types (`& mut? [T]`).
  - Made subslice matching yield a value of type `[T; N]` or `[T]`, not `& mut? [T]`.
  - Allowed multiple mutable references to be made to different parts of the same array or slice in array patterns.

  These changes were made to fit with the introduction of DSTs like `[T]` as well as with e.g. `box [a, b, c]` (`Box<[T]>`) in the future. All points remain true today, in particular with the advent of default binding modes.

- 2015-03-22, PR rust-lang#23361
  Author: @petrochenkov
  Reviewers: Unknown

  The PR adjusted codegen ("trans") such that `let ref a = *"abcdef"` would no longer ICE, paving the way for rust-lang/rfcs#495.

- 2015-05-28, PR rust-lang#23794
  Author: @brson
  Reviewers: @nrc

  The PR feature gated slice patterns in more contexts.

- 2016-06-09, PR rust-lang#32202
  Author: @arielb1
  Reviewers: @eddyb and @nikomatsakis

  This implemented RFC rust-lang/rfcs#495 via a MIR based implementation fixing some bugs.

- 2016-09-16, PR rust-lang#36353
  Author: @arielb1
  Reviewers: @nagisa, @pnkfelix, and @nikomatsakis

  The PR made move-checker improvements prohibiting moves out of slices.

- 2018-02-17, PR rust-lang#47926
  Author: @mikhail-m1
  Reviewers: @nikomatsakis

  This added the `UniformArrayMoveOut` which converted move-out-from-array by `Subslice` and `ConstIndex {.., from_end: true }` to `ConstIndex` move out(s) from the beginning of the array. This fixed some problems with the MIR borrow-checker and drop-elaboration of arrays.

  Unfortunately, the transformation ultimately proved insufficient for soundness and was removed and replaced in rust-lang#66650.

- 2018-02-19, PR rust-lang#48355
  Author: @mikhail-m1
  Reviewers: @nikomatsakis

  After rust-lang#47926, this restored some MIR optimizations after drop-elaboration and borrow-checking.

- 2018-03-20, PR rust-lang#48516
  Author: @petrochenkov
  Reviewers: @nikomatsakis

  This stabilized fixed length slice patterns `[a, b, c]` without variable length subslices and moved subslice patterns into `#![feature(slice_patterns)`. See rust-lang#48836 wherein the language team accepted the proposal to stabilize.

- 2018-07-06, PR rust-lang#51894
  Author: @mikhail-m1
  Reviewers: @nikomatsakis

  rust-lang#8636 was fixed such that the borrow-checker would consider disjointness with respect to mutable references in slice patterns.

- 2019-06-30, RFC rust-lang/rfcs#2359
  Author: @petrochenkov
  Reviewers: The Language Team

  The RFC switched the syntax of subslice patterns to `{$binding @}? ..` as opposed to `.. $pat?` (which was what the RFC originally proposed). This RFC reignited the work towards finishing the implementation and the testing of slice patterns which eventually lead to this stabilization proposal.

- 2019-06-30, RFC rust-lang/rfcs#2707
  Author: @petrochenkov
  Reviewers: The Language Team

  This RFC built upon rust-lang/rfcs#2359 turning `..` into a full-fledged pattern (`Pat |= Rest:".." ;`), as opposed to a special part of slice and tuple patterns, moving previously syntactic restrictions into semantic ones.

- 2019-07-03, PR rust-lang#62255
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @varkor

  This closed the old tracking issue (rust-lang#23121) in favor of the new one (rust-lang#62254) due to the new RFCs having been accepted.

- 2019-07-28, PR rust-lang#62550
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @petrochenkov and @eddyb

  Implemented RFCs rust-lang/rfcs#2707 and rust-lang/rfcs#2359 by introducing the `..` syntactic rest pattern form as well as changing the lowering to subslice and subtuple patterns and the necessary semantic restrictions as per the RFCs.

  Moreover, the parser was cleaned up to use a more generic framework for parsing sequences of things. This framework was employed in parsing slice patterns.

  Finally, the PR introduced parser recovery for half-open ranges (e.g., `..X`, `..=X`, and `X..`), demonstrating in practice that the RFCs proposed syntax will enable half-open ranges if we want to add those (which is done in rust-lang#67258).

- 2019-07-30, PR rust-lang#63111
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @estebank

  Added a test which comprehensively exercised the parsing of `..` rest patterns. That is, the PR exercised the specification in rust-lang/rfcs#2707. Moreover, a test was added for the semantic restrictions noted in the RFC.

- 2019-07-31, PR rust-lang#63129
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @oli-obk

  Hardened the test-suite for subslice and subarray patterns with a run-pass tests. This test exercises both type checking and dynamic semantics.

- 2019-09-15, PR rust-lang/rust-analyzer#1848
  Author: @ecstatic-morse
  Reviewers: @matklad

  This implemented the syntactic change (rest patterns, `..`) in rust-analyzer.

- 2019-11-05, PR rust-lang#65874
  Author: @Nadrieril
  Reviewers: @varkor, @arielb1, and @Centril

  Usefulness / exhaustiveness checking saw a major refactoring clarifying the analysis by emphasizing that each row of the matrix can be seen as a sort of stack from which we pop constructors.

- 2019-11-12, PR rust-lang#66129
  Author: @Nadrieril
  Reviewers: @varkor, @Centril, and @estebank

  Usefulness / exhaustiveness checking of slice patterns were refactored in favor of clearer code. Before the PR, variable-length slice patterns were eagerly expanded into a union of fixed-length slices. They now have their own special constructor, which allows expanding them more lazily. As a side-effect, this improved diagnostics. Moreover, the test suite for exhaustiveness checking of slice patterns was hardened.

- 2019-11-20, PR rust-lang#66497
  Author: @Nadrieril
  Reviewers: @varkor and @Centril

  Building on the previous PR, this one fixed a bug rust-lang#53820 wherein sufficiently large subarray patterns (`match [0u8; 16*1024] { [..] => {}}`) would result in crashing the compiler with a stack-overflow. The PR did this by treating array patterns in a more first-class way (using a variable-length mechanism also used for slices) rather than like large tuples. This also had the effect of improving diagnostics for non-exhaustive matches.

- 2019-11-28, PR rust-lang#66603
  Author: @Nadrieril
  Reviewers: @varkor

  Fixed a bug rust-lang#65413 wherein constants, slice patterns, and exhaustiveness checking interacted in a suboptimal way conspiring to suggest that a reachable arm was in fact unreachable.

- 2019-12-12, PR rust-lang#66650
  Author: @matthewjasper
  Reviewers: @pnkfelix and @Centril

  Removed the `UniformArrayMoveOut` MIR transformation pass in favor of baking the necessary logic into the borrow-checker, drop elaboration and MIR building itself. This fixed a number of bugs, including a soundness hole rust-lang#66502. Moreover, the PR added a slew of tests for borrow- and move-checking of slice patterns as well as a test for the dynamic semantics of dropping subslice patterns.

- 2019-12-16, PR rust-lang#67318
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @matthewjasper

  Improved documentation for AST->HIR lowering + type checking of slice as well as minor code simplification.

- 2019-12-21, PR rust-lang#67467
  Author: @matthewjasper
  Reviewers: @oli-obk, @RalfJung, and @Centril

  Fixed bugs in the const evaluation of slice patterns and added tests for const evaluation as well as borrow- and move-checking.

- 2019-12-22, PR rust-lang#67439
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @matthewjasper

  Cleaned up HAIR lowering of slice patterns, removing special cased dead code for the unrepresentable `[a, b] @ ..`. The PR also refactored type checking for slice patterns.

- 2019-12-23, PR rust-lang#67546
  Author: @oli-obk
  Reviewers: @varkor and @RalfJung

  Fixed an ICE in the MIR interpretation of slice patterns.

- 2019-12-24, PR rust-lang#66296
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @pnkfelix and @matthewjasper

  This implemented `#![feature(bindings_after_at)]` which allows writing e.g. `a @ Some([_, b @ ..])`. This is not directly linked to slice patterns other than with patterns in general. However, the combination of the feature and `slice_patterns` received some testing in the PR.

- 2020-01-09, PR rust-lang#67990
  Author: @Centril
  Reviewers: @matthewjasper

  This hardened move-checker tests for `match` expressions in relation to rust-lang#53114.

- This PR stabilizes `slice_patterns`.

## Related / possible future work

There is on-going work to improve pattern matching in other ways (the relevance of some of these are indirect, and only by composition):

- OR-patterns, `pat_0 | .. | pat_n` is almost implemented.
  Tracking issue: rust-lang#54883

- Bindings after `@`, e.g., `x @ Some(y)` is implemented.
  Tracking issue: rust-lang#65490

- Half-open range patterns, e.g., `X..`, `..X`, and `..=X` as well as exclusive range patterns, e.g., `X..Y`.
  Tracking issue: rust-lang#67264 and rust-lang#37854
  The relevance here is that this work demonstrates, in practice, that there are no syntactic conflicts introduced by the stabilization of subslice patterns.

As for more direct improvements to slice patterns, some avenues could be:

- Box patterns, e.g., `box [a, b, .., c]` to match on `Box<[T]>`.
  Tracking issue: rust-lang#29641
  This issue currently has no path to stabilization.

  Note that it is currently possible to match on `Box<[T]>` or `Vec<T>` by first dereferencing them to slices.

- `DerefPure`, which would allow e.g., using slice patterns to match on `Vec<T>` (e.g., moving out of it).

Another idea which was raised by [RFC 2707](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2707-dotdot-patterns.md#future-possibilities) and [RFC 2359](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2359-subslice-pattern-syntax.md#pat-vs-pat) was to allow binding a subtuple pattern. That is, we could allow `(a, xs @ .., b)`. However, while we could allow by-value bindings to `..` as in `xs @ ..` at zero cost, the same cannot be said of by-reference bindings, e.g. `(a, ref xs @ .., b)`. The issue here becomes that for a reference to be legal, we have to represent `xs` contiguously in memory. In effect, we are forced into a [`HList`](https://docs.rs/frunk/0.3.1/frunk/hlist/struct.HCons.html) based representation for tuples.
@rust-lang rust-lang locked as spam and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 3, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
A-patterns Pattern matching related proposals & ideas A-slice Slice related proposals & ideas A-syntax Syntax related proposals & ideas disposition-merge This RFC is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it. finished-final-comment-period The final comment period is finished for this RFC. T-lang Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the RFC.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.