-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.2k
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
Added Box::take()
method
#93653
Closed
+59
−10
Closed
Added Box::take()
method
#93653
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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 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 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
take
to me has a very strong implication ofmem::take
(orOption::take
or ...) to me, with&mut self
and such, so I would encourage a different name here.👍 to the functionality, though! Makes good sense to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I actually picked the name because it is similar to
mem::take
in the sense of "taking the value out and replacing it with something", in this case replacing it with nothing and tracking it in the state. However if people feel it's strongly associated with&mut self
I'm open to a better name, I'd just like to hear some suggestions on alternatives or a feedback on my own ides for alternatives (see above).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I do see the parallel, though to me this API doesn't do the "and replacing it with something" part that distinguishes
take
frominto_inner
kinds of things.But more importantly to me,
mem::take(&mut my_box)
works today, so I thinkBox::take
doing something pretty different would be surprising. If anything, I might expect it to bemem::take(&mut *my_box)
-- note the deref -- like howRefCell::take
works. (And note thatmem::take(&mut my_option)
does exactly the same thing asOption::take(&mut my_option)
, as another example.)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, what do you think bout
into_parts()
? That one feels like the next best to me now.