Crates.io | keepops |
lib.rs | keepops |
version | 0.0.2 |
source | src |
created_at | 2022-11-03 17:44:33.364697 |
updated_at | 2022-12-08 17:33:25.425996 |
description | Extension traits for keeping the input of mapping functions |
homepage | https://github.com/RobWalt/keepops |
repository | https://github.com/RobWalt/keepops |
max_upload_size | |
id | 704455 |
size | 15,900 |
The library is pronounced "kee-pops". It is a utility library for working with the functional-programming-esque features of rust and tuples.
Have you ever found yourself writing rust code like this?
fn some_fallible_function() -> Option<usize> { Some(0) }
fn some_other_fallible_function(x: usize) -> Option<usize> { Some(0) }
fn double(a: usize) -> usize { 2 * a }
some_fallible_function().map(|input| (input, double(input)));
some_fallible_function().and_then(|input| some_other_fallible_function(input).map(|result| (input, result)));
vec![1,2,3].into_iter().map(|input| (input, double(input)))
You: "Well, sometimes. This explicit input-to-result-tuple-passing can be a bit annoying, but it is managable :)"
Then what about this?
fn some_function_with_many_outputs() -> (usize, usize, usize) { (0, 0, 0) }
fn some_fallible_function() -> Option<usize> { Some(0) }
some_fallible_function().map(|(a,b,c)| (a, b, c, a + b + c))
"Yeah, ok. I see your point, but I don't think it's too ba.."
... then what about this slightly more realistic example?!?
pub struct Apple;
pub struct Banana;
pub struct Chocolate;
pub struct AppleBananaChocolateCakeRecipe;
pub struct AppleBananaChocolateCake;
fn try_gather_fruits() -> Option<(Apple, Banana)> {
Some((Apple, Banana))
}
fn get_some_chocolate_and_hold_onto(apple: &Apple, banana: &Banana) -> Chocolate {
Chocolate
}
fn search_for_recipe_in_book_shelf_while_carrying(
apple: &Apple,
banana: &Banana,
chocolate: &Chocolate
) -> Option<AppleBananaChocolateCakeRecipe> {
Some(AppleBananaChocolateCakeRecipe)
}
fn bake_cake(
apple: Apple,
banana: Banana,
chocolate: Chocolate,
recipe: &AppleBananaChocolateCakeRecipe
) -> AppleBananaChocolateCake {
AppleBananaChocolateCake
}
try_gather_fruits()
.map(|(apple, banana)| {
let chocolate = get_some_chocolate_and_hold_onto(&apple, &banana);
(apple, banana, chocolate)
})
.and_then(|(apple, banana, chocolate)| {
search_for_recipe_in_book_shelf_while_carrying(&apple, &banana, &chocolate)
.map(|recipe| (apple, banana, chocolate, recipe))
})
.map(|(apple, banana, chocolate, recipe)| bake_cake(apple, banana, chocolate, &recipe))
" ... "
As you can see, sometimes mapping can get a bit messy and verbose. But there is
a solution: We can trade in some of that explicit input passing against some
implicit input-under-the-hood-threading. With keepops
the example above would
look like this.
try_gather_fruits()
.keep_tuple_map(|(apple, banana)| get_some_chocolate_and_hold_onto(apple, banana))
.keep_tuple_and_then(|(apple, banana, chocolate)| search_for_recipe_in_book_shelf_while_carrying(apple, banana, chocolate))
.map(|(apple, banana, chocolate, recipe)| bake_cake(apple, banana, chocolate, &recipe))
Much smoother, am I right?
"Well, but th..."
Shhhhhh, I know, I know. It's not perfect, but it reduces repetition and that's the whole point of it. You don't have to use it if you don't want to.