Not exactly the same thing but this is still pretty funny. This is code that is technically 100% legal Rust but you should definitely never write such code 😅.
It’s a test for the compiler which ensures that these legal yet extremely weird expressions continue to compile as the compiler is updated. So there is a purpose to the madness but it does still look pretty funny.
That makes complete sense. Ranges implement fmt::Debug, .. is a range, in particular the full range (all values) ..= isn’t because the upper bound is missing but ..=.. ranges from the beginning to the… full range. Which doesn’t make sense semantically but you can debug print it so add a couple more nested calls and you get a punch card.
I totally didn’t need the Rust playground to figure that out.
Not exactly the same thing but this is still pretty funny. This is code that is technically 100% legal Rust but you should definitely never write such code 😅.
What madness caused this
It’s a test for the compiler which ensures that these legal yet extremely weird expressions continue to compile as the compiler is updated. So there is a purpose to the madness but it does still look pretty funny.
That’s make sense. We used to write some ridiculous tests too, but users still managed to find a way
fn union() { union union<'union> { union: &'union union<'union>, } }Is my favorite.
That makes complete sense. Ranges implement
fmt::Debug,..is a range, in particular the full range (all values)..=isn’t because the upper bound is missing but..=..ranges from the beginning to the… full range. Which doesn’t make sense semantically but you can debug print it so add a couple more nested calls and you get a punch card.I totally didn’t need the Rust playground to figure that out.
This is excellent content