From: Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@proton.me>
To: "Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@nvidia.com>,
"Miguel Ojeda" <ojeda@kernel.org>,
"Alex Gaynor" <alex.gaynor@gmail.com>,
"Boqun Feng" <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
"Gary Guo" <gary@garyguo.net>,
"Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@kernel.org>,
"Björn Roy Baron" <bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com>,
"Andreas Hindborg" <a.hindborg@kernel.org>,
"Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@google.com>,
"Trevor Gross" <tmgross@umich.edu>
Cc: rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust/revocable: add try_with() convenience method
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2025 15:38:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <D8F91L51P2EA.2FBHGJYSV06HY@proton.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D8F8E4PBHK7O.399Y83M1L3XK3@nvidia.com>
On Thu Mar 13, 2025 at 4:08 PM CET, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Thu Mar 13, 2025 at 11:19 PM JST, Benno Lossin wrote:
>> Would it make sense to not use `Result` here and continue with `Option`?
>
> We would have to return an Option<Result<R>> in this case. The current
> code folds the closure's Result into the one of the guard's acquisition
> for convenience.
>
> Actually, I don't think I have ever used try_access() a single time
> without converting its returned Option into a Result. Wouldn't it make
> sense to do the opposite, i.e. make try_access() return Err(ENXIO) when
> the guard cannot be acquired and document this behavior?
Sure, if you're always doing
let guard = rev.try_access().ok_or(ENXIO)?;
Then it makes sense from my view, maybe Danilo has some other argument
for why `Option` is better.
---
Cheers,
Benno
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-13 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-13 12:40 [PATCH] rust/revocable: add try_with() convenience method Alexandre Courbot
2025-03-13 14:19 ` Benno Lossin
2025-03-13 15:08 ` Alexandre Courbot
2025-03-13 15:38 ` Benno Lossin [this message]
2025-03-13 15:48 ` Danilo Krummrich
2025-03-13 17:50 ` Benno Lossin
2025-03-15 14:07 ` Alexandre Courbot
2025-03-15 14:17 ` Danilo Krummrich
2025-03-15 14:26 ` Alexandre Courbot
2025-03-15 17:48 ` Benno Lossin
2025-03-16 12:20 ` Alexandre Courbot
2025-03-16 12:42 ` Danilo Krummrich
2025-03-13 14:37 ` Danilo Krummrich
2025-03-13 15:11 ` Alexandre Courbot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=D8F91L51P2EA.2FBHGJYSV06HY@proton.me \
--to=benno.lossin@proton.me \
--cc=a.hindborg@kernel.org \
--cc=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=alex.gaynor@gmail.com \
--cc=aliceryhl@google.com \
--cc=bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=gary@garyguo.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tmgross@umich.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox