After actually working with it a bit, I still think might be one of the more reasonable popular languages out there, but the semantics of the `?` operator are stupid. It looks like the result of an oath to include it in the language, whatever the cost, between two drunken developers – one from Go one from Haskell.

Follow

@timorl Which part of its semantics and what do you usually want to do instead? (And what would you prefer something-like-? to do instead?)

@robryk I don't particularly like that it treats two types very specially at the level of the language – it would be better if it at least referred to a trait, which one could implement on any type. But I could understand if it was just that, maybe the convenience is worth making the language slightly uglier. What actually convinced me `?` is a mistake is the difference between `f()` and `Ok(f()?)`. As far as I know `?` is the only inherent feature of Rust that performs automatic coersion. Introducing this to the language cannot be worth it.

It would be completely fine as a macro – either `try!` as it used to be or a macro that rewrites `?`s in a function. The latter would preferably have an option for turning automatic coersion on/off, but even if it didn't I wouldn't care that much, as it wouldn't be a inherent feature of the language.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.