Skip to content

Modify RFC #803 (type ascription) to make type ascription expressions lvalues #987

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 10, 2015
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
24 changes: 11 additions & 13 deletions text/0803-type-ascription.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -153,10 +153,10 @@ context of cross-platform programming).
### Type ascription and temporaries

There is an implementation choice between treating `x: T` as an lvalue or
rvalue. Note that when a rvalue is used in lvalue context (e.g., the subject of
a reference operation), then the compiler introduces a temporary variable.
Neither option is satisfactory, if we treat an ascription expression as an
lvalue (i.e., no new temporary), then there is potential for unsoundness:
rvalue. Note that when an rvalue is used in 'reference context' (e.g., the
subject of a reference operation), then the compiler introduces a temporary
variable. Neither option is satisfactory, if we treat an ascription expression
as an lvalue (i.e., no new temporary), then there is potential for unsoundness:

```
let mut foo: S = ...;
Expand All @@ -172,24 +172,22 @@ lvalue position), then we don't have the soundness problem, but we do get the
unexpected result that `&(x: T)` is not in fact a reference to `x`, but a
reference to a temporary copy of `x`.

The proposed solution is that type ascription expressions are rvalues, but
taking a reference of such an expression is forbidden. I.e., type asciption is
forbidden in the following contexts (where `<expr>` is a type ascription
The proposed solution is that type ascription expressions inherit their
'lvalue-ness' from their underlying expressions. I.e., `e: T` is an lvalue if
`e` is an lvalue, and an rvalue otherwise. If the type ascription expression is
in reference context, then we require the ascribed type to exactly match the
type of the expression, i.e., neither subtyping nor coercion is allowed. These
reference contexts are as follows (where `<expr>` is a type ascription
expression):

```
&[mut] <expr>
let ref [mut] x = <expr>
match <expr> { .. ref [mut] x .. => { .. } .. }
<expr>.foo() // due to autoref
<expr> = ...;
```

Like other rvalues, type ascription would not be allowed as the lhs of assignment.

Note that, if type asciption is required in such a context, an lvalue can be
forced by using `{}`, e.g., write `&mut { foo: T }`, rather than `&mut (foo: T)`.


# Drawbacks

More syntax, another feature in the language.
Expand Down