Remove unit #18752
Remove unit #18752
Conversation
|
👍 Been wanting to do this myself but I was afraid of the performance implications of going through interning for each call to Does the hash optimize out, at least? |
| @@ -496,7 +496,7 @@ fn all_constructors(cx: &MatchCheckCtxt, left_ty: ty::t, | |||
| ty::ty_bool => | |||
| [true, false].iter().map(|b| ConstantValue(const_bool(*b))).collect(), | |||
|
|
|||
| ty::ty_nil => | |||
| ty::ty_tup(ref tys) if tys.is_empty() => | |||
| vec!(ConstantValue(const_nil)), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't const_nil be removed as well?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I kept it so that witnesses in non-exhaustive patterns would be more descriptive (i.e. () rather than _) but we can probably achieve that differently.
|
It still might be nice for pedagogical reasons to refer to unit as a kind of separate type in the documentation, since it's so common. (Internally though this is a great refactoring.) |
|
@pcwalton Agreed, the manual still refers to |
ghost
mentioned this pull request
|
|
💃 |
[breaking-change] This will break any uses of macros that assumed () being a valid literal.
ghost
deleted the
The exact version is rustc 0.13.0-dev (0b7b4f075 2014-11-16 22:36:50 +0000) and the relevant upstream issues are rust-lang/rust#18752 and rust-lang/rust#18976. Fixes gfx-rs#439.
The exact version is rustc 0.13.0-dev (0b7b4f075 2014-11-16 22:36:50 +0000) and the relevant upstream issues are rust-lang/rust#18752 and rust-lang/rust#18976. Fixes gfx-rs#439.
It was removed in <rust-lang/rust#18752>.
It was removed in <rust-lang/rust#18752>.
It was removed in <rust-lang/rust#18752>.
It was removed in <rust-lang/rust#18752>.
It was removed in <rust-lang/rust#18752>.
Closes #18614.