[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANiq72k=7+1DFerVniSFeJaPDouu6xBG6vtP1zdtKXm3asRpaA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2025 14:00:16 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>
Cc: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Andrew Ballance <andrewjballance@...il.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Benno Lossin <lossin@...nel.org>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] rust: maple_tree: add MapleTree
On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 11:49 PM Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> As for
>
> assert_eq!(foo().unwrap_err().kind(), ErrorKind::NotFound);
>
> vs.
>
> assert!(foo().is_err_and(|e| x.kind() == ErrorKind::NotFound));
>
> the only thing I can think of is that the former fails differently for when
> foo() is Ok() vs. the error kind does not match. I assume that's what you mean?
>
> If so, I agree it's indeed a downside.
Yeah, the former checks independently the not-`Ok` part; plus we could
make `assert_eq!` print the actual values when it is the error code
part that fails like the real one.
Cheers,
Miguel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists