515

You can pry pattern matching from my cold dead hands (sopuli.xyz)

submitted 3 months ago by flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

227 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] 30p87@feddit.org -5 points 3 months ago

Average Rust code:

macro_rules! sum {
    ( $initial:expr $(, $expr:expr )* $(,)? ) => {
        $initial $(+ $expr)*
    }
}

fn remove_prefix<'a>(mut original: &'a str, prefix: &str) -> &'a str

let mut up = 1;
    'outer: loop {

Hell I don't want to know what you define as ugly then.

[-] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 25 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Macro syntax technically isn't even Rust
This is definitely not average Rust code.

[-] tatterdemalion@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago

Sorry, I love Rust but I can't really agree with you here. They only showed a macro_rules! definition, which is definitely rust syntax. Lifetime annotations are relatively common.

I will concede that loop labels are incredibly rare though.

[-] fruitcantfly@programming.dev 4 points 3 months ago

Loop labels are rare, but they lead to much simpler/clearer code when you need them. Consider how you would implement this kind of loop in a language without loop variables:

'outer: while (...) {
    'inner: while (...) {
        if (...) {
            // this breaks out of the outer loop, not just the inner loop
            break 'outer;
        }
    }

    // some code here
}

In C/C++ you'd need to do something like

bool condition = false;
while (...) {
    while (...) {
        if (...) {
            condition = true;
            break;
        }
    }
    if (condition) {
        break;
    }

    // some code here
}

Personally, I wouldn't call it ugly, either, but that's mostly a matter of taste

[-] Ephera@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago

Well, you'd typically put the loops into a function and then do an explicit return to jump out of there. I believe, there's some use-cases where this isn't possible, which is why I'm cool with loop labels existing, but I've been coding Rust for seven years and have not needed them once...