diff options
author | bors[bot] <26634292+bors[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> | 2021-02-24 19:24:22 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | GitHub <[email protected]> | 2021-02-24 19:24:22 +0000 |
commit | dc14c432f538656dc4c6e33693031fb62dfdcad7 (patch) | |
tree | 1b7a823d2acbc72312e38e259ed5a116d641ccac /crates/syntax/src/validation | |
parent | 0537510aef4059d5f79146a8dc2734ffdb27dc74 (diff) | |
parent | a28e8628255198aa36bcde1f380763ef257beabd (diff) |
Merge #7741
7741: Add convert_for_to_iter_for_each assist r=mattyhall a=mattyhall
Implements one direction of #7681
I wonder if this tries to guess too much at the right thing here. A common pattern is:
```rust
let col = vec![1, 2, 3];
for v in &mut col {
*v *= 2;
}
// equivalent to:
col.iter_mut().for_each(|v| *v *= 2);
```
I've tried to detect this case by checking if the expression after the `in` is a (mutable) reference and if not inserting iter()/iter_mut(). This is just a convention used in the stdlib however, so could sometimes be wrong. I'd be happy to make an improvement for this, but not sure what would be best. A few options spring to mind:
1. Only allow this for types that are known to have iter/iter_mut (ie stdlib types)
2. Try to check if iter/iter_mut exists and they return the right iterator type
3. Don't try to do this and just add `.into_iter()` to whatever is after `in`
Co-authored-by: Matt Hall <[email protected]>
Diffstat (limited to 'crates/syntax/src/validation')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions