prefer if let to match with None => {} arm in some places
#34638
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This is a spiritual succesor to rust-lang#34268/8531d581, in which we replaced a number of matches of None to the unit value with `if let` conditionals where it was judged that this made for clearer/simpler code (as would be recommended by Manishearth/rust-clippy's `single_match` lint). The same rationale applies to matches of None to the empty block.
|
Nice! @bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit d37edef has been approved by |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 4, 2016
…=jseyfried
prefer `if let` to match with `None => {}` arm in some places
This is a spiritual succesor to #34268 / 8531d58, in which we replaced a
number of matches of None to the unit value with `if let` conditionals
where it was judged that this made for clearer/simpler code (as would be
recommended by Manishearth/rust-clippy's `single_match` lint). The same
rationale applies to matches of None to the empty block.
----
r? @jseyfried
zackmdavis
added a commit
to zackmdavis/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2016
In rust-lang#34268 (8531d58), we replaced matches of None to the unit value `()` with `if let`s in places where it was deemed that this made the code unambiguously clearer and more idiomatic. In rust-lang#34638 (d37edef), we did the same for matches of None to the empty block `{}`. A casual observer, upon seeing these commits fly by, might suppose that the matter was then settled, that no further pull requests on this utterly trivial point of style could or would be made. Unless ... It turns out that sometimes people write the empty block with a space in between the braces. Who knew?
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 19, 2016
…empty_block_arm, r=nikomatsakis
prefer `if let` to match with `None => { }` arm in some places
In rust-lang#34268 (8531d58), we replaced matches of None to the unit value `()`
with `if let`s in places where it was deemed that this made the code
unambiguously clearer and more idiomatic. In rust-lang#34638 (d37edef), we did
the same for matches of None to the empty block `{}`.
A casual observer, upon seeing these commits fly by, might suppose that
the matter was then settled, that no further pull requests on this
utterly trivial point of style could or would be made. Unless ...
It turns out that sometimes people write the empty block with a space in
between the braces. Who knew?
# for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
# to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a spiritual succesor to #34268 / 8531d58, in which we replaced a
number of matches of None to the unit value with
if letconditionalswhere it was judged that this made for clearer/simpler code (as would be
recommended by Manishearth/rust-clippy's
single_matchlint). The samerationale applies to matches of None to the empty block.
r? @jseyfried