You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is a tracking issue for the lang experiment into argument splatting, for function overloading and variadic functions (including leaving out optional arguments entirely).
The feature gate for the issue is #![feature(splat)].
About tracking issues
Tracking issues are used to record the overall progress of implementation.
They are also used as hubs connecting to other relevant issues, e.g., bugs or open design questions.
A tracking issue is however not meant for large scale discussion, questions, or bug reports about a feature.
Instead, open a dedicated issue for the specific matter and add the relevant feature gate label.
Discussion comments will get marked as off-topic or deleted.
Repeated discussions on the tracking issue may lead to the tracking issue getting locked.
Experiment Goals
This experiment facilitates limited forms of function overloading, variadic functions, and optional arguments, by improving the existing syntax at the call site.
Rust already has "overloading at home" via the trait system, but calls to overloaded or variadic functions look strange. The goal of this experiment is to make the call sites look like ordinary function calls, and see how that impacts FFI, coherence, and ergonomics.
Rust already has "named arguments at home" via argument destructuring, but calls to named argument functions need to create a struct. We could make call sites look like regular function calls (but with argument names), but that is out of scope for the initial experiment.
Steps
Land no-op feature gate and experimental syntax, for example, fn foo(#[splat] (T, U, …))
Land Tuple-only splatting by tupling during typechecking
Experiment with using the Tuple trait for FFI overloads using Crubit or similar, using a macro
Experiment with using the Tuple trait for variadic versions of stdlib functions like min() or zip()
Land cross-crate caller/callee tests
Land tests that codegen is correct
Land tests for overloading
Land tests for variadics
Land tests for coherence edge cases
Optimise by de-tupling at codegen time
Land codegen tests
Start an RFC based on what's been learned
Unresolved Questions
Semantics
What limits does trait coherence put on foreign function overloads (or variadic functions)?
If two overloads overlap, and are prevented by Rust's trait coherence, (how can we|can we at all|should we) make it possible to call those overloads?
Can we overload on the self type? (self, &self, &mut self, self: Pin<&mut Self›, self: CRef<Self>)
Syntax & Implementation Rules
Should splatted overloads be sealed, or can any crate add new overloads?
Can we leave out optional arguments entirely using this feature, or is there a better way?
What syntax should Rust use for splatting?
Should splatting be allowed on closures, unboxed closures, or "rust-call" functions? What are the semantics?
Which other ABIs should splatting be allowed on? "rust", "C", Windows C++ ABIs (cdecl, fastcall, thiscall, vectorcall), anything else?
Ergonomics & Diagnostics
Will this encourage APIs with large numbers of arguments? How can (or should we) discourage that?
How can we improve method resolution lookup failure diagnostics, so they aren't a large list of different generic tuple lengths?
How does this impact code review, code navigation, and editor suggestions?
Future Work
Will this eventually be useful as a replacement for the "rust-call" pseudo-ABI and related compiler features?
If we allow overloaded functions with the same name in the same module, how will we disambiguate their symbols? (Currently, function definition symbols are just their paths, but overloaded functions have the sane name.)
This is a tracking issue for the lang experiment into argument splatting, for function overloading and variadic functions (including leaving out optional arguments entirely).
The feature gate for the issue is
#![feature(splat)].About tracking issues
Tracking issues are used to record the overall progress of implementation.
They are also used as hubs connecting to other relevant issues, e.g., bugs or open design questions.
A tracking issue is however not meant for large scale discussion, questions, or bug reports about a feature.
Instead, open a dedicated issue for the specific matter and add the relevant feature gate label.
Discussion comments will get marked as off-topic or deleted.
Repeated discussions on the tracking issue may lead to the tracking issue getting locked.
Experiment Goals
This experiment facilitates limited forms of function overloading, variadic functions, and optional arguments, by improving the existing syntax at the call site.
Rust already has "overloading at home" via the trait system, but calls to overloaded or variadic functions look strange. The goal of this experiment is to make the call sites look like ordinary function calls, and see how that impacts FFI, coherence, and ergonomics.
Eventually, overloading might improve the usability of many near-identical standard library methods.
Experiment Non-Goals
Rust already has "named arguments at home" via argument destructuring, but calls to named argument functions need to create a struct. We could make call sites look like regular function calls (but with argument names), but that is out of scope for the initial experiment.
Steps
fn foo(#[splat] (T, U, …))Unresolved Questions
Semantics
self,&self,&mut self,self: Pin<&mut Self›,self: CRef<Self>)Syntax & Implementation Rules
Ergonomics & Diagnostics
Future Work
Sources:
Related features
core::marker::Tuple#157987 can be used for overloadingunboxed_closures&fn_traitsfeature) #29625 eventuallyImplementation history
label_fn_likefor splatted args and add UI tests #157434Experiments
TODO