On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 3:33 AM, spir <[email protected]> wrote: > But the issue exists anyway... dunno about solution. In fact we'd ned to > invert the logic: instead of: > x = foo() // Option element wrapping possible result > x = foo().unwrap() // bare result > think: > x = foo().option() // Option element wrapping possible result > x = foo().direct() // bare result
In what way is this better? Seems to me it's a basically functionless layer of abstraction, and things that don't always have a usable result should always return option, and if you want them to fail, you can request failure via .unwrap(). If this is too verbose, then we should make it less verbose, e.g. `x = *foo()` or something. Or we can keep the status quo, which seems fine to me. I'm not really picky about verbosity. -- Devin _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
