[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <DCMYLXICOGM7.2G4JBQAE7805B@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2025 01:33:26 +0200
From: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@...nel.org>
To: "Benno Lossin" <lossin@...nel.org>
Cc: "Boqun Feng" <boqun.feng@...il.com>, "Miguel Ojeda" <ojeda@...nel.org>,
"Alex Gaynor" <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, "Gary Guo" <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, "Andreas
Hindborg" <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, "Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
"Trevor Gross" <tmgross@...ch.edu>, "Fiona Behrens" <me@...enk.dev>, "Alban
Kurti" <kurti@...icto.ai>, "Greg Kroah-Hartman"
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Krzysztof Wilczy´nski <kwilczynski@...nel.org>,
<rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: pin-init: add references to previously
initialized fields
On Mon Sep 8, 2025 at 12:51 AM CEST, Benno Lossin wrote:
> I actually came up with a third option that looks best IMO:
>
> init!(MyStruct {
> x: 42,
> #[with_binding]
> y: 24,
> z: *y,
> })
>
> The `#[with_binding]` attribute makes the macro generate a variable `y`.
> `x` & `z` don't give access to their value. (we of course should come up
> with a better name).
>
> Any thoughts?
It may be a bit verbose is some cases, but it makes things pretty obvious, so
LGTM.
How about just #[bind] or #[access]?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists