Crates.io | applying |
lib.rs | applying |
version | 1.0.1 |
source | src |
created_at | 2024-07-03 06:42:06.966962 |
updated_at | 2024-08-07 02:14:38.903576 |
description | Apply functions in method-position. |
homepage | https://codeberg.org/fosskers/applying |
repository | https://codeberg.org/fosskers/applying |
max_upload_size | |
id | 1290239 |
size | 22,306 |
Apply functions in method-position.
Much functionality in Rust is provided by methods, but occasionally we're
forced to use certain standalone functions. Examples are functions like
[std::str::from_utf8
] or [std::sync::Arc::new
]:
let user = fetch_user()
.await
.map_err(Error::UserIsLost)?;
let arc = Arc::new(user);
Ok(arc)
Many functions that we write are also effectful, and require us to wrap some
final value in an Ok
. The combination of these factors means that we often
have to bind values to names, even when we don't want to. Naming is hard,
and bad names can cause confusion for later readers. In the above, who
benefits from seeing a symbol named arc
? Names should reflect what
something is, not what it's wrapped in.
And what if the only appropriate name would be the one it already had, say in the case of a "response" value, etc.? This encourages "variable shadowing", as in:
let resp = make_request(req).await?;
let resp = foo(resp);
let resp = bar(resp);
This code is fragile to ownership and refactors. We shouldn't have to write code that looks like this.
This library provides the trait [Apply
], which exposes an apply
method
that is injected into all types via a "blanket implementation". apply
allows you to call top-level functions in a chain with the rest of your
method calls. This way, the original example becomes:
fetch_user()
.await
.map_err(Error::UserIsLost)?
.apply(Arc::new)
.apply(Ok)
Ah, beautiful, consistent nesting. And no spurrious names to confuse the peasantry.