• λλλ
      link
      fedilink
      6
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Do you mind explaining? Maybe with the context of another languages equivalent?

      • @anlumo@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        125 months ago
        let bar: Result<T, E> = ...;
        let foo = bar.inspect(|value| log::debug("{}", value));
        

        is equivalent to

        let bar: Result<T, E> = ...;
        let foo = bar.map(|value| {
            log::debug("{}", value);
            value
        });
        
      • @owsei@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        it’s just a way to use map with a reference instead of the value, by what I understood.

        could be usefull for logging values in a Result so you can see it. However I think you can already do that by just mapping and returning the variable.

    • Ephera
      link
      fedilink
      105 months ago

      std::any is pretty cool. You can use it, for example, to build a map where the key is just the type of the value.

      So, you could query it like this:

      let maybe_position = store.find::<Position>(id);
      

      The id is the ID of an entity which may or may not have a Position associated with it.

      This is similar to just using structs/OOP, so where you’d have a Vec<Entity> and then you’d call entity.position, but the big difference lies in flexibility. An Entity type would need to have all fields defined, which may ever exist on an entity.
      With this type-as-key map approach, you can just tack on new attributes to entities and dynamically react to them.

      All of this is basically how the storage works in the Entity-Component-System architecture (ECS), which is popular in gamedev, for example. But both the storage method and the ECS architecture are good tools to be aware of in normal software design, too.

      • Yeah, I thought of runtime duck typing when I saw it, which is essentially what an ECS is.

        It would be pretty cool to go the next step and be able to find and call methods or discover trait implementations on the type that may not be in the signature. So something like how Go can conditionally type asset an interface to a different interface. I don’t know if that’s possible in a zero cost way (probably not), but it would be interesting.

    • @snaggen@programming.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      155 months ago

      Well, if the only thing you need from reflection is the name of a type, so then yes. But I wouldn’t really call this reflection since it is very limited.

      • Ephera
        link
        fedilink
        95 months ago

        Yeah, Rust can’t have proper reflection, since there’s no external runtime environment that keeps track of your state. Any such smartness either has to be compiled-in (which is how std::any and macros work) or you can implement something to keep track of this state at runtime, as if you were partially building a runtime environment.

          • @QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            15 months ago

            And compile-time reflection will probably also continue to suck due to some irreconcilable limitations of type-safe generic specialization. Oh how I would love an equivalent to C++ template parameter packs…

          • @anlumo@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            05 months ago

            No, the Rust Project recently made sure that Rust can’t have compile-time reflection.

    • @anlumo@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15 months ago

      Unfortunately, it’s not guaranteed to be the same string all the time, so it’s rather useless for anything but debugging and logging.