On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 02:38:34PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote: > On 8/13/26 1:58 PM, Gary Guo wrote: > > On Thu Aug 13, 2026 at 9:48 PM BST, Danilo Krummrich wrote: > >> On Thu Aug 13, 2026 at 8:32 PM CEST, Yury Norov wrote: > ... > >> The code from Eliot does actually already takes advantage of this. In > >> > >> pool.alloc_area(nz::<8>(), Alignment::new::<8>())?; > > > > I have to say this looks quite ugly, compared to just `.alloc_area(8, 8)`. > > In > > this case I'd go with something aesthetically better... > > In addition to aesthetics, a practical concern is that there is a > higher cognitive load to both reading and writing the longer form, > above. Perhaps that is just the price one must pay. > > However, for primitive types, I am hearing (even from Miguel) that > there might be a way to get the static checking *and* an easier > interface. > > Here's hoping you all can find a way to do that. :)
There's a nice postfix macro proposal: computation().macro!().method().another_macro!() https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2442 That would solve the problem. But it doesn't move since 2024. I recall it was mentioned in the bitfields discussion, but maybe it's a false memory...
